'^^s^- 


REGULATIONS 


fibrari.)  of  \\t  Jffkral-sirett  Sotictu 


IN    BOSTON. 


I. 


Tliu  Library  is  open  to  the  use  of  all  tiie  Members  of 
llie  Federal-street  Congregational  Society. 


II. 


Books  are  delivered  from  the  Library  at  the  close  of 
the  morning  service  on  every  Sunday.  Books  must  be 
returned  at  the  same  time. 


Ill, 


Each  person  may  take  two  volumes  at  a  lime. 


IV. 


No  volume  can  be  taken  from  the  Libi-ary,  until  its 
title,  together  with  the  name  and  residence  of  the  person 
on  whose  account  it  is  taken,  has  been  recorded  in  a  book 
kei)t  for  the  i)urpose. 


V. 


Octavo    and    duodecimo    volumes    may    be    kept   four 
weeks;   other  books,  only  two  weeks. 


This  book  was  placed  in  the  Library, 

No. 


-i^ 


Dr.  Chauncy's 
A  N  S  W  E  R 

To  Dr.  Chandler's 

A  P  P  E  A  L  to  the  P  tXBLIC. 


THE 

APPEAL 

T  O    T  H  E 

Public  answered. 

In  Behalf  of  the  Non-Episcopal 
CHURCHESm  AMERICAj 

CONTAINING 

Re  M  A  R  K  s  on  what  Dr.  Thomas  Br  ad- 
bury  Chandler  has  advanced,  on  tho 
four  following  Points, 

The  Original  and  Nature  of  the  Epis$:opal  Office; 

•  Reafons  for  fending  Bishops  to  America. 

The  Plan  on  which  it  is  propofed  to  fend  them. 

And  the  Objections  againft  fending  them  obviated 
and  refuted. 

WHEREIN    THE 
Reasons  for  an  American  Episcopate 
are  fhewn  to  be  infufEcie.nt,  and  theOB^ 
jECTioNs  againft  it  in  full  Force. 

By   C  H  A  R  L  E  S  C  H  A  U  N  c  y,  D.  D. 

And  Paftor  of  the  firft  Church  of  Chrift  in  Bo/ion, 


B     0    S    T    0    N:     N,  E. 

Printed  by  Kn^eeland  and  Adams,  in  A4ilk-Strect^  fcr 
Thomas  Leyerett,  in  Corn-HilW    1768, 
sec 


ADVERTISEMENT. 

ij*^  II  E  y^ujjjor  of^  the  folhwhig  ivot:k  cannot 
fay.,  that  he  undertook  it  in  virtue  of  anj 
%  "Voted  appointment,''  hj  a  '*  convention  of  the 
Clergy"  ;  or  that  he  was  ''^affifted''  in  it^  either  as 
ip  "  mefhpdl\  or  "  nianqgemenf'j  4>/'  direciion^* 
fr.pnji  learned  and  able  4,  hody^  of  men.  Hf  does 
not  -pretend  to  have,  been  favoured  ivith  fuch 
((iftinguipinz  utn-a  lit  ages.  Not  that  his  appear- 
VI g^  upon  ti)i:  occafion^  was  of  his  own  meer  tno- 
tion.,  ■  Me  would  rm[ber  have  cbafe.n  to  hxive  hjeen 
^xeuf^dfrovi  cngcgiTJg  in  on  affair,  that  he  knew 
would  he  attended  with  labour^  and  might  expofe 
Mm  ig  ?nuch  ill-w'-IL  But  he  war,  at  lengthy 
tvcrconie  by  private  friends  '  More  efpecially 
as  urging  this  motive,  its  being  piiblifed  /#, 
the  world,  that,  if  no  "  objcBions  were  offer- 
ed  again  ft-,  Qt  Am  e  r  i  c  a  fJ  Ep  i  s  c  o  p  a  t  e, 
it  would  be  taken  for  granted ^Lh  Parti^es 

>V  K  K  £    S  A  T I S  F  I  K  D ", 


^{M 


INTRODUCTION. 


IT  ha;?,  for  fome  time,  been  known,  that  tht 
Epifcopal  Clergy,  in  the  Colonies,  in  confe- 
(^uence  of  confultations,  in  convened  bodies,  have 
tranfmitted  a  number  of  addreffes  to  England  •, 
one,  to  his  prefcnt  Majedy,  importunately  requelt- 
ing  an  American  Episcopate  ;  o:hers,  to  the 
Arch-Bifhops  cf  Canterbury  and  York,  to  the 
Bifhop  of  London,  and  to  the  Univerfuies  of  Ox- 
ford, and  Cambridge,  iblliciting  their  influence  in 
an  affair  of  fuch  im/portance  to  the  well-being,  if 
not  the  very  being,  of  the  Church  of  England  in 
thefe  parts  of  the  world.  If  this  was  "  never  in- 
tended to  be  kept  a  fecret",  it  was  certainly  made 
one,  at  lead  in  regard  of  the  arguments'  rnade 
ufe  of  in  lupportof  [he  thing  requefted  ;  for  though 
an  authentic  knowledge  of  them  vvas  defired,  it 
could  not  be  obtained  at  firft,  and  I  know  not  that 
it  ever  has  been  fince.  The  affair  feems  to  have 
been  carried  on,  as  it  were,  under  ground,  until 
*'  the  dilcovery  of  a  favorable  dsfpofuion  in  ma- 
ny,", at  home,  towards  the  fupport  of  the  thing 
jnvievv.  And  now,  the  v/ay  beiiig  prepared,  it  is 
*•*  thought  proper,  in  a  public  manntr,  to  give 
informaiion  of  the  Reasons,  why  an  American- 
Epifcopate  is  lb  earneliiy  defired  by  the  Clergy, 
and  other  friends  and  membtrrs.of  the  church".  It 
might  have  been  as  proper,  and  certainly  would 
have  been  more  candid  and  generous,  not  to  fay 
fair,  if  they  had  given  thete  reaipns,  when  they 
fent  cheir  addreffes  fupported  by  them.  VVp 
^ight  then  have  b^en  heard  at  hoine  as  well,  and 

as 


^ 


INTRODUCTION. 


as  foon,  as  they  ;  and  judgment  might  have  been 
made  upon  an  impartial  hearing  of  the  cafe,  and 
not  by  hearing  one  fide  only.  We  are,  after  fuch 
previous  care  to  ripen  matters  at  home  in  their 
favor,  without  all  controverfie,  under  difadvantage 
in  offering  what  we  have  to  fay  upon  this  affair, 
which  may  far  more  nearly  concern  the  civil  as 
well  as  religious  interefts  of  the  Continent,  than, 
feme  may  be  ready,  at  ficft  view,  to  imagine. 

It  muft  not  be  eftetmed  ftrange,  if  '^  fome 
perfons",  I  may  rather  fay  many,  are  "  alarmed 
at  this  condu6t  of  the  clergy".  For  now  "  the 
cafe  has  been  explained",  and  is  well  "  under- 
flood",  there  dill  "remains  uneafinefs" ;  nor  is 
the  exhibited  Plan  "  fo  reafonable",  even  in 
regard  of  the  Epifcopal  churches  ;  or  fo  "  harmlefs 
to  other  denominations",  as  the  Dr.  would  repre- 
fent.  He  hopes,  "  every  objedtion",  or  even  "  fuf- 
picion",  will  be  "intirely  obviated"  by  what  he  has 
to  fay.  But  "  (liould  any  objections  continue, 
which  fliall  be  thought  worthy  of  notice,  objectors 
are  invited  to  proppfe  them  in  fuch  a  manner,  that 
they  may  be  fairly  and  candidly  deba:ed  before  the 
tribunal  of  the  public''.  It  is  m  compliance  wjth. 
this  invitation,  rhar.  rhe  following  fneets  are  wrote; 
as  alfo,  that  it  tni-ht  not  be  "  takr-n  f(T,  granied, 
that  all  parties  acqu^elceand  arefati^ftcd"  We  join, 
with  the  Epifcopalians  in  bringing  thv  cafe  to  open 
tryal  We  defire  nofhira  more  than  an  impariial 
hearing.     Let  the  public  j-idge  between  us. 

I  SHALL  proceed  in  the  method  the  Dr.  has 
chalked  out  -,  taking  into  confideration  his  feveral 
fe6lions  one  by  one,  and  faying  what  may  be 
thought  proper,  in  a  way  of  arilwer,  to  tach  o£ 
them  diftin6ily. 
.^?!<>i!Ol!Ol!eHI«^l<>llOIlOU^ll0ll0{l^l!Oll<>IIOlIOl!^ 

THE 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public 
anfwered. 

Anfvver  to  Seftion  I.  which  contains  "  a 
Sketch  of  the  Arguments  in  favor  of 
Epifcopacy." 

||SSSI|t?E  Dr.  begins  the  fubjefl  before 
"^'^  him  with  premifing,  "  that  the 
I  T  (  ^  Church  of  England  is  Epifcopal^ 
-^(^  and  confequently  holds  the  neceffity 
ii©;©®J|  of  Bifhops  to  govern  the  Churchy 
and  to  confer  ecclefiaftical  powers".  If  he  means, 
that  the  conftitution  of  the  Church  of  England,  as 
eftablifhed  by  law,  is  Epifcopal,  making  Bifhops, 
under  the  King,  and  within  certain  prefcribed  li- 
mits, the  governors  of  the  Church,  and  conveyers 
of  ecclcfialtical  powers,  and  that  this  is  the  dodrine 
of  the  Church,  it  is  readily  acknowledged  :  Bur, 
if  he  intended  to  lead  us  into  this  thought,  that  the 
Church  of  England  holds,  or  is  obliged  to  hold, 
the  Divine  Right  of  Bifhops  to  govern  the 
Church,  or  Confer  ecclefiaflical  powers,  in  virtue 
of  their  being  officers  diftindl  from,  and  fuperior 
to  PreKbyters  j    we  differ  from  him  in  opinion. 

None 


8      The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered. 

None  of  her  public  offices,  no  part  of  the  fyftcni 
cf  her  conduct  towards  the  clergy  is  founded  on 
this  principle.  The  pafTage  he  has  here  quoted, 
from  the  preface  to  the  book  of  ordination,  may 
feem  to  have  an  afped  this  way  •,  but  it  is,  as  the 
late  learned  and  excellent  prof<  fTjr  IVigglefworth, 
obicrves,*  '•  too  (lender  a  foundadon  to  build  uppn 
in  the  picfent  cafe  -,  efpecially,  if ',c  be  remeuiber- 
cdjwho  v/ere  the  compilers  of  that  book,  and  what 
reafon  we  have  to  conclude  they  were  of  the  judg- 
ment, that  Priefts  and  Bijhops  are  by  God's  law  one 
and  the  fame".  This  was  certainly  the  doftrine  of 
the  Church  of  England  in  the  btginning  of  the 
reformation,  and  of  the  g  nerality  of  its  pious  and 
learned  divmes  for  a  very  confiderSible  time  afteir- 
wardsf. 

In  Henry  the  eight's  time,  the  Arch-6ifhops,  Bi- 
fliops,  Arch-Deacons,  and  Clergy  of  England,  in 
their  book  intituled,  "  the  inft'^idion  of  a  chriftiari- 
man,"  fubfcribfd  with  ail  iheir  hands,  and  dedi- 
cated to  the  King,  Anno.  15^7  ;  and  King  Henry 
himTelf,  in  his  book  ftiled,  "  a  necelTary  erudition 
for  any  chriltian-man,"  fet  out  by  the  authority  of 
the  ftatuie  of  32.  H.-nry  VIII.  chap  >6.  approved 
by  both  houfes  of  Parliament,  prefaced  with  the 
King's  own  epiftle,  and  pL^.blilhed  by  his  command 
Anno.  1543,  exprefly  refolve,  '*■  that  Priefts  and 
Bidiops  BY  God's  Law,  are  one  and  the  fame  ; 
and  that  the  power  of  C>rdinati6n  and  excom- 
municaaon  belongs  equally  to  them  both. J 

Edward 

*  Sober  Remarks,  p^g.   i  r. 

t  See   the  many   quotations  from   their  writings  to  this 

purpofe,  by   the    cf-iebrated    Or.    Stillingfltet,   in   his 

JreniTum,  pag     394..  and  onwards. 
J  Calamy's  defence  of  mOd,  hQn-coiiforihity,  ptg.  ^tl 


^he  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered,     ^ 

Edward  the  fixth  no  fooner  came  to  the  throne; 
than  he  took  proper  methods  to  go  on  with  the 
reformation,  begun  in  the  former  reign.     Among 
other  meafures,  he  called  an  aflembly  of  felefl  Di- 
vines, the    moft   refpedable  for  ftatlon,  piety  and 
learning  in  that  day,  and  propofed  to  them  feveral 
queftions,  relative  to  the  fettlement  of  religion  ac- 
cording to  God*s  word  j  to  which  queftions  they 
gave  in   feverally  their  refolutions  in   papers,  all 
whofe  judgments  were  accurately  fummed  up,  and 
fet  down  by  the  Arch-Bifhop  of  Canterbury  him- 
felf.     In  anfwer  to    the  loth   queftion,  ''  whether 
Bifh'ops  or  Priefts  were  firft",  Arch-Bifhop  Cran- 
mer's   opinion,  given    in  writing  under  his   own 
hand,  was  this,  "  Biihops  and  Priefts  were  at  one 
time,  and  were  not  two  things,  but  one  office  in 
the  beginning  ot  Chrift*s  religion".  *     The  Bifliop 
of  Afaph,  Dr.  Therleby,  Dr.  Redmayn,  and  Cox, 
were  all  of  the  fame  opinion  with  the  Arch-Biftiop  ; 
and  the  two  latter  exprefly   cited  the  opinion  of 
Jerom  with  approbation,  f     In  this  fame  reign,  in 
a  public  declaration,  fubfcribed  by  the  Arch-Bifh- 
ops  of  Canterbury  and  York,  eleven  Biftiops,  and 
many  other  Dodlors  and  Civilians,  it  is   exprefly 
aflfertcd,  "  that,  in  the  new-teftament,  no  mention 
is  made  of  any   degrees,  or  diftindion  of  orders, 
but  only  of  Deacons  or  minifters,  and  of  Priefts  or 
Bi(hops".  X     It  is  indeed   beyond  all  reafonable 
difpute,  that  the  Epifcopal  form  of  government 
was  fettled,  at  the  reformation,  as  Dr.  Stillingfleet 
exprefles   it,  §  "  not  under  pretence  of  divine 
RIGHT,  but  for  the  conveniency  of  that  form  to 
the  ftate  and  condition  of  the  Church  at  the  time 
B  of 

*  Irenicum  pag.  392.  f  Ibid.  pag.  393. 

J  Bifhop  Burnet's  hift.  of  the    reformation,  and  Ncal's 
iiift.  of  Puritanifm,  §  Iren.  pag.  385, 


lo     The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered. 

of  Its  reformation".  And  it  is  in  fadl  true,  that, 
both  in  Henry  the  eighth's  time,  and  in  Edward 
the  fixth's,  the  Bifhops  "  took  one  commifiions 
from  the  Crown  *  like  other  State  Officers, 
for  the  exercifing  their  fpiritual  jurildidiGn  ;  in 
which  they  acknowledge,  that  all  sorts  of 
jurifdidlion,  ecclefiaftical  as  well  as  civil,  flow 
ORIGINALLY  from  the  Regal  power,  as  from  a 
SUPREME  Head,  f  the    fountain  and  Ipring  of 

ALL 

*  The  refcript  of  Edward  the  6th,  cited  by  S?;nders, 
runs  thus,  *'  To  Thomas,  Arch-Bifhop  of  Canter- 
^'  bui7 — Since  from  the  King  all  power  and  jurird'6li- 
*'  on  proceed, — we  give  thee  power,  within  thy  Dio- 
**  cefs,  to  give  orders — by  thefe  prefents  to  endure  at 
*'  our  pleafure".  Dr.  Lay  ton's  appeal  to  the  Parlia- 
ment againft  Prelacy,  pag;.  i6.  This  fame  writer  adds, 
'*  In  the  ifl:  year  of  the  faid  Edward  6th,  it  is  enaded, 
that  they  fhould  exercife  no  jurifdicHiion  in  their  Dio- 
cclles,  nor  fend  out  writs,  but  in  the  King's  name,  and 
under  his  feal  j  which  ilatute  was  abrogated  in  the  ift 
of  Q^  Pvlary,  and  re-eftablifhed  by  Q^  Elizabeth,  and 
in  the  iirft  of  King  James". 

f  Agreable  to  this  is  Arch-Bifhop  Cranmer's  anfwer  to 
the  9th  of  King  Edward's  queflions,  which  is  thus  ex- 
prefied,  ''  All  chriftian  Princes  have  committed  unto 
them  immediately  of  God  the  whole  care  of  all  their 
fubjciSl:?,  as  well  concerning  the  adminiftration  of  the 
word  for  the  care  of  foul,  as  concerning  the  miniftra- 
tion  of  things  political,  and  civil  governance.  Ard  in 
both  thcfe  adminiftrations,  they  muft  have  fundry  mi- 
nifters  under  them  to  fupply  that  which  is  appointed  to  • 
their  feveral  offices.  The  civil  minifters,  under  the 
King's  Majefty,  in  this  realm  of  England,  be  thofe 
whc  m  it  fhall  pleafe  his  Kighnefs,  for  the  time,  to  put 
in  authority  under  him  5  as  for  example,  the  Lord 
Chancellor,  the  Lord  Treafurer",  &c.  The  miniflers 
of  God's  word  under  his  Majefty  be  the  Biftiops,  Par- 
fons,  Vicars,  and  fuch  other  Pfiefl:s  as  be  appointed  by 

his 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered.     1 1 

ALL  Magiflracy  within  this  kingdom  ;  and  that 
they  ought,  with  grateful  minds,  to  acknovvledge 
this  favor  derived  from  the  King's  liberality  and 
indulgence  j  and  accordingly,  they  ought  to  ren- 
der it  up  whenever  the  King  thought  Hl  to  require 
it  of  them.  And  among  the  parriculars  of  eccle- 
fiaflical  power  given  then^  by  thi?  commifTion,  is 
that  of  ORDAINING  Prefbyrers  •,  and  all  this  to 
laft  no  longer  than  the  King's  pleafure".  *  Even 
in  the  days  of  Queen  Elizabeth,  when  there  was  a 
re-eltablifhment  of  Church  government,  after  the 
fiery  reign  of  Queen  Mary,  in  the  articles  of  reli- 
gion agreed  upon,  the  Englifh  form  of  Church- 
government  was  only  determined  to  be  "  agreable 
to  God^s  v/ord",  which,  as  Bifliop  Stillingfleet  fays, 
"  had  been  a  very  low  and  diminifhing  expreffion, 
had  they  looked  on  it  as  abfolutely  prefcribed  in 
fcripture,  as  the  only  neceiTary  form  to  be  obferv- 
ed  in  the  Church".  Nay,  as  this  fame  writer  ob- 
ferves,  f  if  we  come  lower  to  the  time  of  King 
B  2  James, 

his  Highnefs  to  that  miniHratlon  ;  as  for  example,  the 
Bifhop  of  Canterbury,  the  Bifliop  of  Durefm,  the 
Bifhop  of  Winchefter,  and  the  Parfon  of  Wynwick. 
All  the  faid  officers  and  minifters,  yS  well  of  the  one 
fort  as  the  other,  be  appointed,  afligned,  and  clc6led  in 
every  place  by  the  lav/s  and  orders  of  Kings  and 
Princes".  This  fame  Arch-Bifhop,  in  anfwer  to  the 
King's  eleventh  queftionp  fays,  '•  A  Bifliop  may  make 
a  Priefl:  by  the  fcriptures,  and  fo  may  Princes  and  Go- 
vernors alfo,  and  that  by  the  authority  of  God  commit- 
ted to  them  ;  and  the  people  alfo  by  their  clectipn. 
For  as  we  read  that  Bilhops  have  done  it,  fo  chriflian 
Emperors  and  Princes  ufuaily  have  done  it.  And  the 
people,  before  chfiftian  Princes  v^^erc,  commonly  did 
ele(^  their 'Bifliops  and  Priefts''.     Iienicum  pag.  391. 

*  Rights  of  the  chriftianChurch,  pref.  pag.  29.  as  cited  by 
the  DilTent.  Gentleman's  anfwer  to  White,  pag.  202. 
t  lieiiicum,  pag.  394.. 


12    The  Appeal  to  the  PubHc  anfwered. 

James,  his  Majefty  himfelf  declared  it  in  print,  as 
his  judgment,  "  that  the  civil  power,  in  any  na- 
tion, hath  the  right  of  prefcribing  what  external 
form  of  Church-government  it  pleafes,  which  doth 
mod  ao;ree  to  the  civil  form  of  government  in  the 
itate",^. 

The  plain  truth  is,  this  notion  of  the  right  of 
Bi(hops  to  govern  and  ordain,  as  being  oflicers  in 
the  Church,  fuperior  to  Prefbyters  by  Divine 
APPOINTMENT,  was,  as  the  excellent  Mr  J,  Owen 
fays,  "  firft  promoted  in  the  Church  of  lingland 
by  Arch-Bifhop  Laud.  Dr.  Holland,  the  King's 
profelTor  in  Oxon,  was  much  offended  with  him 
for  afferting  it  in  a  difputation  for  his  degrees. 
He  checked  him  publicly,  and  told  him  he  v;eht 

about 

*  So  far  from,  the  beginning  of  the  reformation  as  1722, 
the  lower  houfe  of  convocation  addrelTt'd  the  upper^ 
fign'f>ing  their  trouble  to  find  themfVlves  zfp^rkd^  as 
ill  afrlcbd  to  the  M  tropolitical  and  Epifccpai  rights, 
begging  their  Lordfhips  v/ou'd  not  give  credit  to  any 
fucli  eviffaggeftions,  as  alfo  that  the  declaraticn  they 
had  made  a?i<.i  figned  might  be  entered  on  their  books. 
The  import  of  t'nis  dcciaratiori  wa^,  "  that  whereas 
they  had  been  fcandaioufly  reprefented  as  favorers  of 
Prcfbytery,  in  opp^fuion  to  Epifcopacy,  they  now  de- 
clared, that  they. acknowledged  the  order  of  Bifhops, 
as  suPEP-ioR  to  Preibvters,  to  be  of  Divine  aposto- 
lical institution'* -—= 

The  fame  day  they  'prefented  an  additional  addrefs,  fig- 
nifying,  that  whereas  this  their  declaration  had  given 
NEW  OFFENCE,  and  that  from  having  been  traduced 
for  alio  wing  too  little  to'  Epifcopacy,  they  were 
now  accufcd  of  ascribing  too  much  to  it,  they 
begged  therefore  that  their  Lort,  fhips  would  take  the 
*do(Strine  atorefaid  into  their  rnature  confidcratioii."-^ 
Ci*iam)'s  abridgment,  pag.  66/3  668* 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered,     13 

about  to  make  a  divifion  between  the  Englifh,  and 
other  reformed  Churches".  * 

It  may  have  been  the  pradllce  of  the  Church 
of  England,  for  feme  time,  as  the  Dr.  obferves, 
*'  to  admit  none  to  officiate  as  Clergymen,  who 
have  not  been  ordained  by  Bifliops".  But  it  was 
not  always  fo.  The  point  of  re-ordination  did  noc 
begin  to  be  urged,  until  the  days  of  Arch-Bi(hop 
Laud.  Through  his  infiuence,as  Mr.Prin  tells  us^f 
Bifhop  Hall  rc-ordained  iVIr.  John  Dury,  a  mini- 
iler  of  the  reformed  Church.  But  the  old  Church 
of  England  did  not  require,  or  pradtife  re-ordina- 
tion. In  King  Edward  the  fixth's  time,  Peter 
Martyr,  Martin  Bucer,  and  P.  Fagius,  had  eccle- 
fiallical  preferments  in  the  eftablifhed Church  with- 
out it.  J  Mr.  William  Whitingham  was  made 
Dean  of  Durham,  about  1563  ;  though  ordained 
by  Prefbyters  only.  §  In  like  manner,  Mr.  Tra- 
vers,  ordained  by  a  Prefbyter  beyond  fea,  was  fe- 
ven  years  Ledurerat  the  Temple,  and  had  theBi- 
fhop  of  London's  letter  for  it.  |I  And,  even  in  the 
reign  of  King  James  the  firll,  the  validity  of  ordi- 
nation by  Prefbyters  was  notfet  afide  •,  as  appears 
from  the  cafe  of  the  three  Prefbyters  that  were 
coniecrated  Bifnops  for  Scotland,  at  London.  % 

The 

*  Plea  for  fcripture  ordination,  pag.  115.  f  Owen's 
plea  for  fcrip.  ordination,  pag.  117.  4:  Ibid.  p.  118. 
§  Ibid.  p.  121.         II  Ibid.  p.   122. 

fl  See  the  cafe  related  at  large  in  Piercers  Vind.  of  Di/Tent. 
pag.  167.  He  likewif«  here  tells  us,  when  the  Arch- 
BiSiOp  of  Spalato  was  in  England,  he  defired  Bifhop 
Morton  to  re-ordain  a  perfon  ordained  beyond  fea, 
that  he  might  be  more  capable  of  preferment.  The 
Bifhop  wrote  him  in  anfwer,  that  it  could  not  be  dons 
but  to  the  fcandal  of  the  reformed  Churches,  wherein 
he  would  have  no  hand. 


14     The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfvvcred. 

'  The  Dr.  having  premifed,  that  the  Church  of 
England  nolds  the  neccffity  of  Bifhops  to  govern 
the  Church,  and  conftr  urderi,  fays,  "  ic  is  not 
neceiTaiy  to  enter  upon  a  particular  defence  of  this 
dodnne,  fmce  the  plea",  in  the  prefenf  undertak- 
ing, "  is  equally  valid^  whether  thefe  principles 
are  founded  rightly  or  wrongly".  Why  then  did 
he  put  himfclf  to  the  trouble  of  exhibiting  "  a 
fketch  of  the  arguments,  whereby  the  necelTity  of 
Epircopal  goveinment  is  defended"  ?  I  know  of 
no  valuable  end  this  was  adapted  to'  anfwer.  It 
may  have  increafed  the  number  of  his  pages_  -,  bur, 
at  the,fa!ne  time,  it  has  detained  his  readers  from 
attending  to  the  main  bufinefs  in  hand;  and  need- 
lefly  too,  as  I  imagine  ;  fince  he  has  given  us  only 
a  detail  of  arguments  that  have  been  repeated 
over  and  over  again,  and  as  repeatedly  been  an- 
fwered.  However,  he  has  made  it  proper,  if  not 
neceffary,  to  poRpone  the  confideraiion  of  the 
grand  point  in  view,  until  I  alfo  have  given  "  a 
ilcetch  of  the  arguments"  that  have  been  ufed  on 
the  other  fide  of  the  queilion. 

He  fays,  "  ic  is  an  effential  dodrine  of  the 
Church  of  England,  that  none  have  any  authority 
in  the  chriftian  Church,  but  thofe  who  derive  ic 
from  Chrili,  either  mediately  or  im-??ediatelf\  This 
is  not  a  dodrine  peculiar  to  the  Engliih  Church. 
Every  other  chriltian  Church,  of  whatever  djeho- 
mination,  holds  the  farne.  The  Churches,  in  the 
Colonies,  are  certainly  of  this  opinion.  But  we 
differ  from  the  Dr.  when  he  lays,  ''  that  this  au- 
thority muff  be  derived,  \f  mrdiately^  by  a  regular 
fuccefiion",  meaning  hereby  an  uninteirupied  one, 
in  a  line  of  Bifliops,  as  an  order  fuperior  to  Prefbyr 
ters,  even  from  the  Apoilles  :  Nor  can  we   be 

broi.'ghi: 


5 

The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered.     i 

brought  to  think,  that  the  uninterruption  of  this 
line  of  fufCC'Oion  is  so  necessary,  that,  "  if  it 
be  ONCE  broken,  and  the  power  of  ordination 
[that  is,  the  power  in  this  way  communicated]  lod, 
not  ail  the  m^a  on  earth,  not  all  the  angels  of 
heaven,  without  an  immediate  com  million  from 
Chriil,  can  reftore  it".  Is  this  the  do6trine  of  the 
Church  of  England  ?  1  am  bold  to  fay,  no  fuch 
th;ng  can  be  found  in  the  thirty-nine  articles,  or 
in  the  homilies,  or  in  the  form  of  ordination,  or  in 
the  common-prayer-book,  or  in  any  part  of  the 
Church's  fyliem  in  regard  of  the  Clergy  :  Nor  is 
it  eafij^  fuppoleable,  that  one  in  an  hundred,  even 
of  thoie  who  are  tborow  Epif^opalians:,  make  this 
the  objed:  of  their  faith.  It  is  indeed  fcarce  cre- 
dible, that  any  who  have  read  the  fcripturcs,  which 
every  where  fo  exprefly  fecure  the  great  biemnga 
purchafed  by  Chrift  to  all  that  believe  in  him,  re- 
pent,&  fincerely  obey  him,fhoald  imagine  nocwith- 
flanding,  that  all  who  have  a  right  to  thcfc  bleffings 
muft  be  alfo  members  of  a  particular  Church,  over 
which  an  olBcer  fuperior  to  Prefbyters  preiides, 
and  in  an  uninterrupted  fuccellion  from  the  Apo- 
ftles  ;  efpecialiy,  when  this  pretended  regular 
fucceffion  is  fo  far  from  being  incontedable,  that 
it  is  not  capable  of  good  proof,  nor  is  there  any 
probability,  that  fo  long  a  chain,  running  through 
fo  m.any  ages  of  ignorance,  violence,  and  all  kinds 
of  impofture,  has  never  once  been  broken.  *     To 

make 


* 


The  reader  may  fee  this  matter  fet  in  its  proper  light 
by  Bifhop  Stillingflect,  in  his  Irenicum  ;  by  Profeflbr 
Jamefon,  in  his  fundamentals  cf  the  Heirarchy  exa- 
mined ;  and,  above  all,  by  Mr.  Thomas  Walter,  one 
of  the  fiift  gentlemen  for  genius  and  learning  this 
Country  has  produced,  in  his  anfwer  to  a  piece  pub- 

lifhed 


1 6     The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered, 

make  the  very  being  of  a  Church,  and  all  cove- 
nant hopes  of  falvation  to  reft  upon  To  precarious 
a  foundation,  is,  in  reality  of  fenfc,  to  expofe 
ihe  Church  and  religion  of  Jefus  Chrift  to  open 
ridicule  — It  will  alio  follow  from  hence,  that  all 
the  public  worfhip  of  the  Colonifts,  that  are  not 
Epifcopalians,  of  all  the  diilenters  in  England  and 
Ireland,  of  the  Church  of  Scotland,  and  of  all  the 
reformed  protedant  Churches  abroad,  whofe  mi- 
niilers  were  ordained  by  "  the  laying  on  of  the 
hands  of  the  Prefbytery"  only,  is  a  vile  affront 
and  abomination  to  Chriit  the  head  of  his  Church. 
So  very  charitable  is  this  dodrine  of  the  Dr.  Jn- 
ftead  of  deferving  a  ferious  confutaiion,  it  may 
reafonably  excite  the  contempt  of  all,  who  are  ac- 
quainted wi^h  the  genius  and  fpirit  of  true  chrifti- 
anity. — It  will  farther  follow  from  this  dodrine, 
thai,  it  the  popiUi  Bifliops,  at  the  reformation,  had 
{luck  to  their  old  principles,  and  diicontinued  the 
fucceffion  of  the  miniflry  by  refufir.g  to  confecrate, 
or  to  ordain,  any  but  thofe  of  their  own  commu- 
nion, it  had  then  been  the  duty  of  the  Proteftant 

laity 

liihed  here  in  defence  of  Epifcopacy,  upon  the  plan  of 
an  uninterrupted  fuccellion.  Perhaps,  the  fubjed  was 
never  handled  in  a  more  mafterly  and  thorow  manner. 
No  attempt  has  been  made,  by  way  of  reply,  though 
he  wrote  forty  years  ago.  Mr.  Petoy  the  Hiftorian 
fays,  that  the  Church  of  England,  as  well  as  the  Scotch 
■  Church,  was  at  firft  planted  and  governed  without 
Bifnops,  until  Bifhops  were  fent  them  from  Rome. 
And  there  cannot  be  any  good  evidence  produced,  that 
there  were  any  Bifhcps  in  England,  until  Auftin  the 
Monk  was  fent  from  Rome.  He  was  made  Bifhop  of 
Canteibury,  fays  Koffman,  about  the  year  of  Chrift, 
595.  it  will,  perhaps,  be  found  difficult  to  make  out 
the  fucceflion  from  him.  No  man  alive  can  do  it  from 
the  Apollles  in  an  uninterrupted  line. 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anf\vered.     xj 

laity  to  "  forfake  the  afTembling  themfelves  to- 
gether", and  all  fucceeding  generations  muft  have 
been  content  without   the  public  worfhip  arid  or- 
dinances of  God,  until  a  new  commilTion  was  fenc 
down  from   heaven,  giving  power  to  fome  new 
apoftles  to  admmifler  them,  and  to  tranfmit  again 
the  fame  office   to  their  fucceflbrs.     The  Dr.  ac- 
cording to  his  principles  mull  affirm  **ill  this  ;  and 
yet,  I  believe,  he  will  not  be  very  free  openly  and 
explicitly  to  do  it. — But  the  word  of  this  dodlrine 
of  an  uninterrupted  fucctrffion  is  (till  behind  \  for 
it  is  derived  through  the  Bishops  of  Rome,  who 
for  an  hundred  years   together,  as  Baroneus^him- 
felf  acknowledges,  *  namely  from    the  year  nine 
hundred, to  the  year  one  thoufand,  were  *'  monfters 
for  ignorance,  luft,  pride  and  luxury".     I  cannoc 
fo  well  exprefs  myfelf  here,  as  in  the  words  of  one 
of  the  bed  writers  upon  the  fubjed  in  controverfie  5 
fays  he,  in  one  of  his  letters  to  Mr.  White,  -f 
*'  Thefe  very   orders,  in    which  you  glory,  you 
*•  acknowledge   to   have  derived  only  from  the 
*'  Church  of  Rome  %,  a  Churchy  which  yourfelves, 
'*  in  your  homilies,  confefs   to  be  idolatrous  and 
*'  antichriftian"  •,  "  not  only  a  harlot,  as    the 
*'  fcripture  calleth  her,  but  alfo  a  foul,  filthy,  old, 
*'  withered  harlot  \    the  foulefl  and  filthieft  that 
*«  was  ever  {^tn, — And  that,  as  it  at  prelent  is> 
"  and  hath  been   for  nine  hundred  years,  it  is  fo 
*«  far  from  the  nature  of  the  true  Church,  that 
"  nothing  can  be  more*'.     Note,   thefe  homilies 
*'  every  Clergyman  publicly  declares  and  fubfcribes 
"  with    his  hand,  that  they  contain  a  godly  and 
«'  wholfome  do5frine^  fit  to  be  read  in  Churches  by 
C  "minifters"o 

*  A.  D.  911.— 5.  8.  t  Diffent.  Gentleman's 

anfwer,  pag.  92,  ()j. 


i8     The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfvvereci. 

"  minifters.     Now  it  is  only,  Sir,  from  \\\\s,  filthy^ 
"  withered^  old  HARLOT^  that  you  derive  by   or- 
"  dmation  youv  fpiritual defcent.     You  confefsyour 
"  felves  born  of  her  ^  as  to  ecclefiaftical  fedigree, :  And 
^' ibe  fins  of  this  fouled  and  fihhiefl:   of  harlots, 
*'  you  acknowledge  as  brethren^  by  admitting  their 
"  orders  as    regular   and  valid  •,  whereas  thofe  of 
"  the   Prol^ftant  Church  you  reje6l.     If  a   Prieft^ 
"  ordained  with  all  the  fuperftitious  and  idolatrous 
*'  rites  of  this  anlichriflian  and /^//'^  Church,  ccmes 
"■  over  to  the  Church  of  England,  you  admit  him 
*'  as  a  BROTHER,  duly  ordained,  without  obliging 
*'  him  to  pafs  under  that  ceremony   again  :  But 
*'  if  a  minifler  of  the  reformed  Church  ]o\ns  himfelf 
"  to  you,  you  confider  him  as  but  a  Layman,  an 
'*  unordained  perfon,  and  oblige  him  to  receive  or- 
*'  ders   according  to  your  form.     How,  Sir,  is  it 
*'  poffible  to  account  for  this  procedure  ?  Can  that 
*'  Church,  which   is   no  true  Church,    impart 
*'  i;^//^.and  true  orders  ?  Can  a  filthy  old  harlot 
*'  produce  any   other  than  afpurious  and   corrupt 
*'  breed  ?  Will  you  reft  the  validity  and  regularity 
*'  of  your  miniftrations  on   your  receiving  the  fa- 
**  cerdotal  chara6ler  from  the  Bifhops  and  Popes  of 
*'  the  Romifh  Church  ?  Many,    if    not    melt,    of 
*'  whom,  were  men  of  mod  corrupt  and  infamous 
"'  lives  ;  men,  who  were  fo  far  from  being  regular 
*•  and  valid  Ministers  in  the  Church  of  Jesus 
*'  Christ,  that  they  were  not  fo  much  as  regular 
*' or  r<f^/ Members  of  it  at  all  ;  and  therefore 
*'  could  not  poflibly,  duly  or  regularly,  officiate 
*'  therein  -,  confequenily,  had  no  power  to  com- 
"  municate  ov  conwty  orders  ov  offices  in  the  chri- 
*'  stian  Church.     Whatever  offices  therefore  they 
*'  conveyed,  are  at  befl  doubtful  and   fufpicious  5 
**  if  not  abiblutely  null,  irregular,  and  void.     So 

•^  tl]at . 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered/    19 

^?  that  your  own  orders,  if  ftridlly  examined,  may 
*^  miniltcr  great  doubt  &  di'quietude  of  mind". — 
I  iliall  only  fay  farther,  upon  this  article  of  fuc- 
GcfTion,  fuppofing  it  was  true,  which  is  by  no 
means  allowed,  that  "  obje(5lors  could  not  prove 
it  has  been  interrupted'*,  this  is  far  from  being 
fuliicient,  in  a  matter  of  fuch  essential  impor- 
tance, as  the  Dr.  makes  the  fucceflion  to  be.  Was 
I  in  his  way  of  thinking,  I  fhould  not,  I  freely 
own,  dare  ofHciate  as  an  officer  in  the  kingdom  of 
Chrift,  unlefs  1  v/as  able  to  fatisfie  my  ft  If,  upon 
pofuive  evidence,  plear  and  indubitable,  that  the 
Biihop,  froHa  whom  I  had  received  orders,  derived 
his  power  to  confer  them  on  me  in  an  uninter- 
rupted line  from  the  Apofties  :  Nor  fhould  I  be- 
lieve, that  the  people  of  my  charge  a6led  a  wife 
and  lafe  part,  unieis  they  aUb,  upon  like  evidence, 
were  fully  convinced,  that  I  had,  in  this  way,  re- 
ceived my  commifiion  from  Chrift.  It  is  my  firm 
perfuafion,  the  Dr.  would  never  again  preach  to 
his  people,  or  they  be  willing  to  hear  him,  if  his 
preaching,  and  their  hearing,  was  10  be  confequenc 
upon  the  proof  he  could  give,  that  the  Bifhop,  v/ho 
crJamed  him,  had  in  a  dire6l  line  fucceeded  fome 
one  of  the  Apoftlcs.  I  cannot  therefore  but  e- 
fteem  it  highly  rafh  and  extravagant  in  him  to  fay, 
that,  if  the  fuccefiiun  could  be  proved  to  have 
been  broken,  "  Chrift  has  negieiled  to  provide 
for  his  Church  in  a  cafe  efiential  to  the  very  being 
or-  It  . 

We  again  agree  with  the  Dr.  when  he  fays, 
'«  that  the  Apoftles  underftood  the  laws  of  Chrift — 
'*  that  they  were  conduced  by  the  Spirit  of  God — 
?*  that  they  have  f?iven  explicit  and  particular  rules 
*'for  the  goyernment  of  the  Church— that  the 
C  z  ,'' public 


^p     The  Appeal  to  tjiq  Public  anfwered, 

^'  public  pradice  of  the  Apoftles  is  a  faithful  and 
*^'  plain  comment  on  the  laws  of  Chrift,  and  of 
'I'  equal  authority  with  any  written  inftrudlions— 
"  that  our  blefied  Saviour  committed  the  govern- 
"  ment  of  his  Church  to  them — that  this  govern- 
*'  ment  was  exercifed  by  them — and  that  they  con- 
«'  veyed  it  to  others,  to  be  communicated  to  others 
''^  dill  to  the  lateft  pofterity".  Thus  far  we  are 
pcrfeftly  agreed  ;  but  we  mud  now  part  again. 
We  cannot  fay  with  the  Dr.  "  that  thele  fucceflbrs 
were  an  order  diftinfl  from,  and  fuperior  to,  thofc 
who  are  now  called  P/tfbyters  ;  and  that  none 
who  were  not  of  this  higheil  order  had  the  power 
of  ordination  &  government  committed  to  them". 
He  has  not  Teen  Rt  to  give  us  here  the  evidence 
vpon  which  this  point  may  be  eftablifhed,  ieaft  it 
fhould  "  lead  hin>tco  far  from  his  prefent  de- 
fign".  It  might  therefore  be  fufficient  to  fay,  ic 
cannot  reafonably  be  expeded  we  fhould  be  bro't 
to  be  of  his  mind,  until  we  have  feen  this  proof, 
and  are  convinced  by  it.  However,  ]  ihall  not 
^hink  it  a  going  cut  of  my  way,  juft  to  remark 
one  thing,  which  is  unaccountably  ftrange,  if  Bi- 
fhops  are,  by  apodolic  appointment,  an  order  of 
ofncers  in  the  Church  dittind  from,  and  fuperior 
to,'  Prcfbyters.  It  is  this.  The  Apoftles  have  not 
any' where  given  inftrudions,  defcriptive  of  the 
73erfons  fit  for  the  work  of  the  miniftry,  that  are 
at  all  adapted  to  the  fuppofition  of  "a  difference 
OF  ORDER  in  the  paftoral  office.  Had  there  been 
fuch  a  difference,  different  qualifications  would 
have  been  requiGte  to  the  futable  difcharge  of  the 
different  trufts  arifing  therefrom  ;  and  it  might 
ji.iflly  have  been  expeded,  ;hat  they  would  have 
diftinguilhed  between  the  qualifications  refpedive^ 
ly  proper  for  the  management  of  each  of  thefe 
^  "  truflso 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfvvered.     21 

trufts.  But  they  no  where  thus  diftinguifh.  They 
no  where  intimate,  that  fuch  different  endowments 
were  neceffary.  Far  from  this,  they  have  fpecihed 
the  qualifications  of  one  order,  of  pallors  only  ; 
as  may  be  feen  at  large  in  the  Epiftlcs  to  Timothy 
and  Titus.  And,  what  may  be  worthy  of  fpecial 
notice,  they  have  been  veiy  particular  in  defcrib- 
ing  the  qualifications  of  this  one  order,  while 
they  are  totally  filenc  with  refped  to  the  other  that 
is  pleaded  for,  though  that  other  is  faid  to  be  by 
much  the  moft  honorable  and  important  of  the 
two.  In  like  manner,  ihey  have  no  where  laid 
down  any  rules  for  the  guidance  of  ordainers  in 
veiling  ordinary  minifters  mih  different  degrees 
of  power.  They  no  where  fpeak  of  the  inflitution 
of  two  diftindl  orders  of  (landing  pallors  ;  they 
no  where  give  inftrudlions  to  exercife  the  or- 
daining right  conformably  to  this  diflindlion,  by 
placing  fome  in  an  higher,  others  in  a  lower  rank 
in  the  Church.  The  facred  writings  of  the  Apo- 
llles  fay  nothing  to  fuch  a  purpofc  as  this  :  On 
the  contrary,  they  prefc-nt  to  our  view  a  very  full 
and  explicit  diredory  for  the  ordination  of  one 
ORDER  ONLY  of  fixed  pallors.  This  we  have  in 
the  lr*auline  inRrudlions,  referring  to  the  fettle- 
ment  of  theChurches  in  Crere.  i  he  greatApollle 
of  the  Gentiles  gives  it  in  charge  to  Titus,  whom 
he  left  in  this  IQand  with  ii  dired  view  to  "  fet  in 
order  the  things  that  v^^ere  wanting",  to  or- 
dain paftors  in  the  feveral  Churches  ^there.  But 
what  paftors  were  they  ?  Of  a  different  rank,  fome 
fuperior,  others  inferior  ?  Not  a  word  leading  to 
fuch  a  thought  is  to  be  found  throughout  his  whole 
Epiftle.  No  ;  but  the  paftors  he  direds  fhould 
be  ordained  were  precifely  of  the  fame  rank  or  de- 
gree ;  Nor  did  Ti^us  ordain  any  other.     He  could 

noc 


11     The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwercd, 

not  indeed  have  done  it,  unlcfs  he  had  a6led  coun^ 
ler  to  the  diredion  he  had  received  from  the  in- 
fpired  Paul.  Should  ic  be  faid  here,  Titus  was 
Jiimielf,  at  this  time,  the  fole  Billiop  of  Crete,  and 
as  fuch  inrrufted  with  the  fole  power  of  ordaining 
inferior  paRots  ;  the  anfwcr  is,  this  canno.  be  lup.- 
ported  upon  jutl  and  folid  grounds.  It  is  a  meer 
pretence,  as  we  h.ave  often  had  cccafion  to  mal<.e 
very  clearly  evident. 

The  Dr.  now  proceeds  to  confider  tlie  evidence, 
in  favor  of  Epilcopacy,  in   his  fenfe   of  ir,  "  from 
ihe  general  (late   of  the   primitive  Chu  ch".     If, 
when  he  fays,  "  it    is.  a  known  facl,  that    all  the 
*'  Churches  that  were   gathered,  during   the  JlrJJi 
"  Century,  by  the  Apcliics,  or.  their  MifTionaries, 
'*  were  under  the  diredion  of  fome  one  or  other  of 
''  that  venerable  order  -,  that   men  of  the  moll  e- 
**  minent  piety,  who  had  been  honored  with  their 
*'  acquaintance,  Vv'ere  appointed  by  thcrn  to  fuper- 
*^  intend  Churches    in   certain  dillrids,    fome    of 
"  whom    were  chofen   to  iuccced  tlicm    in   ihiofe 
'*  Churches  which    they    had   aUvays   kept   under 
''  their  ovvn  immediate  infpedion''  ;  1  lay,  if  by 
this  fadl  he  means,  that  the  perfons  appointed   by 
the  Apofllrs   in    ilieir  day,  or   cholcn   afcci  v.'ards, 
luiihln    this  Ce}Uirr)\  to   iucceed    thrm    in    fuptr- 
intending  the  Churches,  vverecfiiceis  of  a  fupcrior 
order  to  thofe,  who   are  calkd,  rn   the  New-teda- 
ment,   fometimes   Bidiop?,    fomelimes  Prtfbyttrs, 
meanini^  by  thefe  names  one  and  the  fame   order 
of  men,  he  Hiould  have  given    better   proof  of  it, 
than  a  bare   declaration,  that  ''  nothing  but  grcis 
prejudice,  or  a  wrangling. and  captious  difpofition, 
10  lay  ncthing  worlc,  could  lead  any  to  fufped  or 
cfTerL"  the  contrary.     He  is  ^nuch  miftaktn,  if  he 

imagines, 


The  Appeal  to  thePablic  anrwered, 


2d 


imagines,  that  prejudice,  or  wrangling  captioiifnels, 
or  any  thing  worle,  is  confined  co  Frclbyterians. 
The  (ticklers  for  Prelacy  are  as  much,  no:  to  lay 
a  great  deal  moi-e,  under  the  influence  of  thele 
fatal  hindrances  to  the  reception  of*'  the  truth  in 
the  love  of  it".  All  he  has  laid  here  in  favor  of 
Epifcopacy,  in  the  (cnk  he  underitands  ir,  refts 
folely  upon  his  meer  affirmation. 

He  goes  on,  "  if  we  confider  the  general  cha- 
rader  of  Chriftians,  and  the  ftate  of  the  Church, 
in  tht  fecond  and  third  Centuries,  we  (hall  not  find 
it  eafie  to  believe^  that  there  could  have  been  any 
efTencial  departure  from  the  original  plan  of  difci- 
pline  and  government  committed  to  the  Church". 
There  certainly  was  not.  The  ftate  of  things  was 
not  much  varied  from  this  plan,  within  ihxifccond 
Century.  Bifhops  were  not  as  yet  known,  as  an 
order  in  the  Church  di(lin6l  from,  and  fuperior  to, 
Prefbyters.  The  promifcuous  uie  of  the  terms 
Bifhop  and  Prefbyter  was  dill  in  ufe  ;  nor  is  that 
mode  of  didlion,  Bishops,  Presbyters  and 
Deacons,  to  be  met  with  in  any  writer  befbre 
Clement  of  Alexandria,  v,/ho  did  not  floundi  until 
the  latter  end  of  this  fecond  Century,  unlefs  we  ex- 
cept IgnatiuSj  *  in  whofe  corrupted  and  interpo- 
lated 

*  The  Dr.  in  a  marginal  note,  pag.  8,  9.  is  pleafed  to 
offer  a  few  words  in  favor  of  the  Ignatian  E-piftles^  in 
oppofition  to  Dr.  Chauncy*s  Dudleian  Lecture  at  ths 
College  in  Cambridge  ;  in  which  he  endeavoured  to 
invalidate  their  teftimony.  Says  Dr.  Chandler,  "  hs 
undoubtedly  knows  that  he  has  been  ab'e  to  offer  no- 
thing new  on  fo  exhaufted  a  fubjcct'*.  He  did  not  aim 
at  this  ;  though  he  may  have  added  Tome  neiv  thoughts, 
at  leaft  the  old  ones  are  placed  in  a  new  light.  It  fol- 
lows, "  and  others  know,  that  he  has  faid  nothing  a- 

gain(t 


24     The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered. 

lared  Epiftles,  this  manner  of  fpeaking  is  com- 
mon. If,  when  the  Dr.  fpeaks  of  the  "  writings 
of  the  fathers  that  are  ftill  extant,  their  apologies, 

private 

gainft  the  authenticity  of  thefe  Epiflles,  but  what  has, 
long  ago,  been  fairly  and  fully  confuted",      7'his  is  ari 
eafie  way  to   anfwer  any  thing.     He  would  have  done 
himfelf  much  more  honor,  as  a  man  of  learning,  if,  iti 
a  way  of  folid  argument,  he  had  himfelf  taken  off  the 
force  of  what  had  been  obje£ted  againft  the  authenticity 
of  thefe  Epiftles.     The  author  of  the  DudleiAn  dif- 
courfe  thought  it  below  him  to  reject    the  Ignatian  E- 
pijlles  as  corrupt,  and   not  to  be  depended   on,  becaufc 
great  and  learned  men  knev/  this  to  be  the  real  truth  ; 
bat  he  was  at  the  pains,  in  a  courfe  of  juft  reafoning, 
to  evince  it  to  be  fo.    Meer  affirmations, m  controverted 
points,    however   fanguinely   delivered,  are    meer  no- 
things, and  accounted  fo  by  all  capable  judges. 
He  fays  farther,  *•'  although  the  advocates  for  Epifcopacy 
fee  no  neceility  for  giving  up  the  teflimony  of  Ignatius, 
it  is  not  from  an  opinion  that  their  caufe   wouTd  labor 
vnder  any  great  diftrefs  without  that   fupport".     We 
are  not  very  ftrongly  inclined  to  give  full  credit  to  what 
is  here  delivered.     Ignatius  is  the  only   writer,   until 
towards  the  clofe  of  the  fecond  Century,  that  is  of  any 
fervice  to  the  Epifcopal  caufe.     Prelatical  writers  know 
it,  and  accordingly  repair  to  his  Epiftles  as  their  Sheet- 
anchor  ;  and  they  did  fo,  with  as  much  zeal    and  afTu- 
rance  as  they  do  now,  w^hen  they  had  no  copies  of  thefe 
Epiftles,  but  fu'ch  as,  at  this  day,  are  acknowledged  by 
Epifcopalians  thcmfelves  to  have  been  fo  corrupted  and 
interpolated,  as  not  to  be  capable  of  a  juft  vindication. 
If  they  had  thought  their  caufe  ''  would  not  have  la- 
bored under  diftrefs'*  without  thefe  Epiflles,  they  would 
not  have  been  at  fuch  immenfe  pains   to  purge  them,- 
and  fupport  their  authority  for  their  proper  ufe. 
The  Dr.  exclaims,  "  hard  is  the  fate  of  ancient  writers  ! 
*'  For,  if  they  do  not  countenance  modern  opinions, 
*'  the  authority  of  their  writings  will  be  difputed.    And 
<«  whe-n  an   obftinate  oppofition  is  once  undertaken, 
««  whether  from  intereft,  or  fpleen  and  malignity,  no 

*'  ancient 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered.     23 

private  epiflles,  the  regulations  and  decrees  of 
councils,  and  the  report  of  ecclefialtical  hirtorians, 
as  exhibiting  evidence  of  irrefiftablc  force,  in  favor" 
of  Epifcopavy*'  ;  1  lay,  if  he  means,  by  thele  an- 
cient records,  fuch  as  are  to  be  met  with  in  the 
Tv/o  FIRST  Cencuriesj  he  is  grofly  niiftaken  while 
D  he 

*'  ancient  authors  are  fo  fecure,  not  even  thofe  of  feme 
*'  of  the  holy  Bible,  but  that  fuch  adventurers  may  be 
*'  able  to  do  fome  injury  to  their  reputation  and  autho- 
*'  rity".  Had  not  the  Dr»  been  himfeif  moft  evidently 
under  the  prevailing  influence  of  Intereft,  or  Malignity^ 
or  both,  or  fomething  v/orfe,  when  he  wrote  this,  it 
would  not  have  had  a  place  here.  He  knows,  or  might 
have  known,  if  he  had  read  even  Epifcopal  writers,  and 
thefe  only,  thatKNAVi&H  Forgeries  were  common, 
even  in  thofe  times  that  are  called  primitive.  Scarce 
one  of  the  Apoftles^  or  firft  Chriflian  fathers,  have  e- 
fcaped  being  perfonated  by  fome  wretched  impoftor,  in 
fome  work  or  other  fent  into  the  world  under  their 
name.  Even  Jefus  Chrift  himfeif  has  been  thus  bafely 
tifed.  One  muft  be  quite  unacquainted  with  the 
ancient  writings  not  to  know  this.  Nay,  it  is  the 
truth  of  fait,  and  acknowledged  to  be  {o,  not  only  by 
Epifcopalians,  but  even  Roman-Catholic-Writers,  that 
IGNATIUS  in  particular  has  been  moft  fraudulently 
dealt  with,  no  lefs  than  eight  of  the  fifteen  Epiftles 
that  bear  his  name  being  Forgeries  ;  yea,  it  is  faffc 
likewife,  and  owned  to  be  fo,  that  the  other  seven, 
before  the  editions  of  Ufher  and  Voilius,  had  been  so 
CORRUPTED  by  fome  knavifh  interpolator,  that  they 
ought  not  to  be  received  as  his  genuine  works.  Their 
great  advocate  and  defender,  Biihop  Pearfon,  exprefly 
declines  the  vindication  of  them,  in  their  old  editions, 
notwithftanding  the  care  and  pains  of  Vedelius  to  purge 
them.  Had  the  Dr.  attended  to  thefe  indubitable  fafts, 
he  would  not  have  made  the  above  bitter  complaint  ; 
much  lefs  would  he  have  inferred  his  narrative  from 
Father  Hardouin^  which  is  as  much  to  the  purpofe,  asi 
if  he  had  told  the  ftory  of  a  cock,  and  a  bull,  and  three 
ram-chickens,  with  which  the  children  are  fometimes 
diverted. 


^6     The  Appeal  to  the  Putllc  anfvvercd. 

he  thinks,  that  they  will  be  of  any  fervice  to  thePre- 
latical  caufe.  Ignatius  excepted,  whole  Epiilles 
have  been  proved,  in  the  Dudleian-discourse, 
to  have  been  fo  corrupted  as  to  be  unworthy  of 
notice,  none  of  the  primitive  wriccrs,  within  this 
period,  fpeak  of  the  government  of  the  Church, 
as  committed  to  Bilhops,  in  the  fenfe  here  con- 
tended for.  If  Epifcopaiians  are  pleafed  to  affirm 
the  contrary,  let  it  be  remembered,  the  onus  prC" 
handi  lies  with  them  ;  and  if  they  can,  let  them 
give  us  good  evidence,  that  any  of  thefe  writers 
fay,  that  Bifhops  are  an  order  in  the  Church  fupe- 
rior  to  Prefbvters  ;  that  ordination  was  the  pecu- 
liar work  of  Bifhops,  in  diftmdion  from  Prefby- 
ters  ;  that  Epifcopal  government  was  that  by 
which  the  Church  was.  governed  -,  and  that  this 
form  of  govern m.ent  was  inltituted  by  Chriil,  or 
his  Apollles.  Until  they  do  this,  which  we  know 
it  is  not  in  their  power  to  do,  we  fhall  continue  of 
the  mind,  that  no  more  can  be  colleeted  from  the 
fa'thers,  within  this  period,  than  from  the  fcnp- 
tures  themielves,  to  give  countenance  toEpifcopa- 
cy,  in  the  view  in  which  we  oppofe  it. 

If,  by  the  writings  of  the  fathers  referred  tOj 
the  Dr.  means  the  fathers  after  the  fecond  Cen- 
tury, and  downwards,  we  don't  think  any  tefti- 
monies  from  them  will  be  much  to  the  purpofe  ; 
as  it  is  v;eli  known  to  all,  who  know  any  thing  of 
antiquity,  that  we  are'NOw  got  into  thofe  times, 
in  which  there  was  a  deviation  from  the  purity  and 
fimplicity  of  the  gofpel,  in  many  other  things  be- 
fides  this  of  the  government  of  the  Church.  We 
are  free  to  acknov/ledge,  that,  in  the //6/V^  Century, 
there  began  to  appear  a  departure  from  the  origi- 
nal plan  of  government  m   the  Church.     Biihops 

were 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered.     27 

were  now  diflinguifhed  from  Prefbycers  ;  though, 
to  afcertain  the  precife  idea  meant  by  this  dirtindti- 
on,  will,  1    believe,   be  found,  upon    tryal,  to  be 
exceeding  difficult.     It  is  indubitably  clear,   than 
ihe  Church  was  governed,  as  yet,  by  Prefbyters 
as  well  as  Bifhops  :   Nor  does   it   appear,  that   a 
B  fliop  was  NOW  any  thing  more  than  the  head  of 
a   SINGLE    flock,  or  congregation,   the  affairs   of 
which  were  managed,  nor  by  the  Bifhop  alone, 
?.%  though  all  power  was  veiled  in  him  ^  but  by  its 
Prefbyters  alfo,  united  in   one   common    council. 
This  is  plainly  vifible  thro'  the  whole  of  Cyprian's 
writings.     Nay,  that  wonder  of  learnmg,  Profcffor 
Jamefon,  is  very  pofuive  in  it,  that,  in  the  opinion 
of  Cyprian  himfelf,  Bifliops  were  no  otherwjfe  fu- 
perior  to  Prefbyters,  than  Peter  was  to  the  other 
Apoftles,  the  First,  the  Head,  of  one  and  the 
fame  order  in  theChurch.  *     But,  whatever  the  di- 
fiindion  was, that  m.ight  caice  place,  in  time, between 
BiQiops  and  Prefbyiers,  it  was  undoubtedly  fmall 
in  its  beginning":;.     Xhe  Bifhop  was,  at  firfl,  only 
PRIMUS   INTER  PARES,  the  Head-Prefbytcr,   the 
prs^fes  of    the    confiltory  j  and  it  was  gradually 
arid  imperceptibly  that  he  attained  to  that  dignity 
and  power,  with  which  he  was  afterwards  vefled. 
It   did    not    come   into    event  at  once.     Ic    was 
the  woik  of  time,  and  a  long   time   too.     From 
Prime- PrefDyters  arofe  Bliliops  ;  fromCity-Bifnops, 
Biiliops  whofe  power  extended  to  the  neighbour- 
ing Country-Churches  •,  and,   when     chriflianity 
had  got  the  feculararm  on  its  fide,  and  corruptioa 
had  incteafed  therev/ich,  as  it  hallily  did  to  a  mon- 
ftrous  height,  w-  now   hear  of  Diocefan  Bifliops  ; 
from  thefe  arofe  Metropolitans  ;  from  Mitropoli-  - 
tans,  Patriarchs  j  and  finally,  at  the  top  of  all,  h  % 

D  2  hoiinefs. 

* 

*  S.ee  his  Cyprianus  Isotiniu?,  chap.  4-th5  thrcughc^t* 


28     The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfvvcred. 

hcLnefs,  the  Pope,  claiming  the  charadter  of  unu 
vcrial  Head  of  the  Church.  This  (lace  of  things 
came  on  infenfibly,  fhep  by  fttp,  and  not  all  at 
once.  It  began,  in  a  degree,  even  in  the  i^poilles 
days,  difcovering  itfelf  in  the  pride  of  Diotrcphes^ 
who  *'  defired  the  prehcnrinence"  ;  and  it  went 
on  increafing,  until  the  rife  of  th,at  amazing  power^ 
which  for  fo  many  Centuries,  l;as  opprefTed,  and 
deltroyed,  the  faints  of  the  riioll  high  God. 

This  will  reafonably  and  fully  account  for  "^  a 
departure  from  iht  original  plan  of  government", 
without  its  making  at  tirfl,  or  in  its  gradual  ad* 
vances  for  a  while,  "  any  violent  flruggles  and 
convulfions"*'.  According  to  the  prophetic  decla- 
ration of  the  Apofcle  Paul,  it  was  lo  come  on 
MYSTERIOUSLY  •,  and  fo  it  did  in  fcft,  and  infen- 
fibly too,  until  the  powers  of  this  world  could  be 
called  in  to  the  aid  of  afpiring  grafping  Clergy- 
men ;/and  then  there  was  bufile,  ilj'uggling,  and 
noiie  enough  :  For,  from  this  time,  we  read  of 
jictle  elfe,  inEccleHallical  hiftory,  but  the  fquabbles 
of  {bme  of  the  Clergy,  and  their  artful,  and  lome- 
limes  perfidious,  managements  to  enrich  and  ag- 
grandize themfelves,  to  the  deprefnon  of  others  ^ 
until,  at  length,  he  that  is  called  the  son  of. 
PERDITION  became  tiie  Man  of  sin  grown  up 
iQ  his  fullnefs  of  ftature, 

Tpje  Dr.  has  introduced  th.at  truly  great  rran, 
Mr.Chillingworth,  faying,  *'  v/heni  Ihali  fee  all  the 
*'  fables  in  the  Meiamcrphofis  aded,  and  prove 
*'  tiue  fiories  ♦,  vv'hen  I  fliall  lee  all  the  Democracies 
*'  and  AriPiocraHes  in  the  v/orld  lie  down  and  ileep, 
''  and  awake  into  Monarchies  ;  then  will  I  begin 
^'  to  believe,  that  Prefbytcrian  government,  liav- 
^'  ing  continued  in  tlic  Churchy  during  the  Apo- 

^'  ftles 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered.     29 

*'  files  times,  fhouid  prefently  after  (againfl:  the 
*'  Apoftlcs  dodrineand  the  will  of  Chrift)  be 
**  whirled  about  like  a  fcene  in  a  Mafque,  and  traf- 
*'  formed  into  Epifcopacy".  1  alfo  ihall  infert  a 
few  pafTages  from  this  celebrated  writer,  leaving 
it  with  the  Public  to  judge,  whofe  quotations,  the 
Dr's  or  mine,  reflect  mod  honor  on  him,  and  are 
the  ftrongetl  illuftiation  of  his  real  greatnefs. — 
Says  he,  *••  By  the  religion  of  Froteltants,  I  do 
not  underftand  the  dodrine  of  Luther,  or 
Calvin,  or  Melandlon  -,  nor  the  confelTion  of  Au- 
gufta,  or  Geneva  i  nor  the  catechifm  of  Heidel- 
burg  ;  nor, the  articles  of  the  Church  of  England  i 
no,  nor  the  harmony  of  the  Proteftant  confcfiions  : 
5ut  that  in  which  they  all  agree,  and  which  they 
all  fiibfcribe  with  a  greater  harmony,  as  a  perfcdt 
rule  of  their  faith  and  adions  ;  that  is,  the  Bible. 
The  Bible,  I  fay,  the  Bible  only  is  the  religion 
of  Proteitants. — I,  for  my  parr,  after  a  long,  and 
(as  1  verily  believe  and  hope)  impartial  fearch  of 
the  true  v/ay  to  eternal  happinefs,  do  profefs  plain- 
ly, that  I  cannot  find  any  reft  for  the  fole  of  my 
foot,  but  upon  THIS  ROCK  ONLY.  I  fee  plainly, 
and  with  my  own  eyes,  that  there  are  Popes  a- 
^ainft  Popes,  Councils  againft  Councils,  feme  Fa* 
thers  againft  others,  the  fame  Fathers  againft  ihem- 
felves,a  confent  of  Fathers  of  one  age  againft  a  con- 
lent  of  Fathers  of  another  age,  the  Church  of  one 
age  againft  theChurch  of  another  age. — In  a  word, 
there  is  nofufficient  certainty  but  of  fcripture  only, 
for  any  confidering  man  to  build  upon.  This 
therefore,  and  this  only,  I  have  reafon  to  believe  ; 
this  1  will  profefs  ;  according  to  this  1  will  live  ; 
and  for  this,  if  there  be  occafion,  1  will  not  only 
willingly,  but  even  gladly  lofe  my  life  ;  though  I 
fliould  be  forty  that  Chriftians  ftiould  take  it  irom 

me. 


30     The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered. 

me.     Propofe  me  any  thing  out  of  this  book,  and 
require  whether  I  believe  it,  or  no  ;  and   feem  ic 
never  j»©  incomprehenfible  to  human  reafon,  1  will 
lubrcribe  it  with  hand,  and  heart  ;  as   knowing, 
no  demofjftration  can  be   ftronger  than  this,  God 
has  faid   io^  therefore  it  is  true".  *     It   is   flrange 
that  one,  who  couid  make  fo  good  a  judgment  of 
thi^  ancierit  Fathers,  and  give  his  fcntiments  con- 
cerning them  with   Rich   exacl   truth,  and  found 
reafon,  lh:;uld  afterwards  write  in  the  manner  he 
IS  here  reprefcmed  to  have  done  in   relation  to  E- 
pifcopacy.     It  is  certain,  he  was  wrought   upon, 
by  the  famous  J^foic,  who  went  under  the  name 
of  John  Fifnrr,  to  forfake  the  communion  of  the 
Church  of  England,  and  to  embrace  the  RomiHi 
religion,  and  to  do  it  with  an  incredible  fatisfaction 
pt  mind.      Perhaps,  the   bed  wdy   to  account  tor 
the  extravagant  mode  of  language  in  which    he 
writes  of  Epifcopacy,  is   to  tuppole,  that   he  was 
under  fom.e  undue  influence  from  thofe  arguments 
whrch  had  induced  him  to  profefs  himfelf  a  Roman- 
Catholic.     And  there  may  be  the  more  reafon  to 
iufped  this,  as^  afccr  his  convcifion  from  Popery-, 
ic  appears,  from  a  letter  of  his  toDr. Sheldon,  ''  that 
he  had  icruples  about  leaving  the  Church  of  jRdme, 
and  returning  to  the  Church  of  England"  ;   which 
fcrcplcs  he  freely  declared  to  his  frien  Js.  f     1  fliall 
only  add  here,  much  greater  men,  than  Mr.  Chil- 
lingworth,  far  knowledge  in  ilntiquity,   it  not   for 
reafoning  powers,  and  in  the  communion   pf  the 
Church  of  England  too,  not  to  fay    any   thing  of 

others, 

*  Relii^Ion  of  Protcftants,  a  faf^  way  to  falvatlon,  chap. 
6.  kct.  56. 

t  Bayle's  Critic.  Pi6t.  in  the  edition  that  contains  the 
lives  never  before  publifhcd^  under  the  name.  Chilling- 
worth. 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwcredo     31 

others,  quite  differ  from  him  upon  thehead  of  Epif- 
copacy,  and  as  urged  hereto  from  their  intmiate 
acquaintance  with  the  writings  of  the  fathers,  as 
well  as  the  facred  fcriptures.  That  great  Anti- 
quary, the  learned  Arch-Bifliop  Ullier,  in  a  letter 
to  Dr.  Bernard,  fays,  "  I  have  ever  declared  my 
opinion  to  be,  that  "  Epifcopus  et  Frelbyter,  gradu 
tantum  differunr,  non  ordine"  -,  that  is,  Bifliop 
and  Prtibyter  differ  only  in  degree,  not  in 
ORDER.  And,  in  the  clofe  of  this  letter,  he  adds, 
"  for  the  teftifying  my  communion  with  thefe 
Churches,  [the  reformed  ones  in  France  and  Hol- 
land] which  I  do  love  and  honor  as  true  members 
of  the  Church  univerfai,  I  do  p^jfefs,  that,  with 
like  affedlion,  I  fhould  receive  the  bleffed  facra- 
ment  at  the  hands  of  the  'Dutch  minifters,  if  I  was 
in  Holland  ;  as  I  iliould  do  at  the  hands  of  French 
miniilers,  if  1  were  in  Charentone  *  The  cele- 
brated Bifhop  Burnet  fays,  "  1  the  more  willingly 
incline   to  believe   Bifhops  and  Prefbyters  to  be 

SEVERAL    DEGREES  OF   THE    SAME   OFFICE   j  finCC 

the  names  of  Bifliops  and  Prefbyters  are  ufed  for 
the  fame  thing  in  fcripture,  and  are  alfo  ufed  pro- 
mifcuouily  by  the  writings  of  the  two  firft  Centu- 
ries", f  I  (hall  only  mentipn  farther  the  learned 
Dr.  Stillmgtieet,  who  was  as  well  verfed  in  the  fa- 
thers as  any  man,  in  his  day,  or  fince.  His  words 
are  thefe,  J  "  I  believe,  upon  the  ftriclefl:  inquiry, 
Medina's  judgment  will  prove  true,  that  Jerom, 
Auftin,  Ambrofe, Sedulius,  Primafius,  Chryloftom, 
Theodoret,  Theophyla61:,were  all  of  Aerius's  judg- 
ment as  to  ihe  Identity  of  both  name  and  order 
of  Bifhops  and  Prefbyters  in  the  primitive  Church". 

And 

*  The  judgment  of  the  late  Arch-Bifhop  of  Armagh,  on 
feveral  points,  by  R.  Bernard,  D.  D>  pag.  125,  126. 

t  Vind,  of  the  Church  of  Scotland.      %  Iren.  pag,  276. 


32     The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfvvered. 

And  again,  a  little  onwv-'.rds,  ''  I  do  as  yet  defparr 
of  finding  any  one  fingle  teftimony  in  all  Anti- 
quity, which  doth  in  plain  terms  alTcrt  Epifcopacy, 
as  it  was  fettled  by  the  pradtice  of  the  primitive 
Church  in  the  ages  following  the  Apoftles,  to  be 
of  UNALTERABLE  Divine   right". 

The  two  propofitions,  from  which  the  confe- 
qaences  are  drawn  which  finidi  this  Sedion,  are 
both  utterly  denied  ;  and,  upon  what  has  been 
offered,  we  may  fairly  and  juftiy  fay  in  diredl  con- 
tradidlion  to  them  : 

That  Epifcc^al  government  was  not  at  all^ 
much   lefs   univerfally,   received    in   the  Church 

PRESENTLY    AFTER    the  ApoftlcS  timCS. 

There  is  therefore  no' room  for  the  fuppofition 
\^      of  an  alteration  in  tj^iL  Government  presently 
AFTER  thefe  times  ;  and,  in  fad,  there  was  no 
fuch  SPEEDY  alteration. 

Episcopacy  therefore  was  not  fo  ancient  as  is 
pretended,  nor  is  there  any  need,  or  reafon,  to 
luppofc,  or  fay,  it  was  apoflolic. 


)^)eC5@CM)^)^)s(^)^M^^)^M)e(X)sC)^5^)§()s()^ 


ANSWER 


A  N  S  W  E  R  to  Section  II.  which  fays,  "  Thd 
Powers  peculiar  to  the  Epifcopal  Office  are 
Government^  Ordination^  and  Confirmation". 

THE  Dr's  bufinefs  here  is  to  explain,  and  efta^' 
blifh,  the  proper  fuperiority  of  BiQiops  to 
Preibyters.     In  order  to  this,  he  previoufly  endea- 
vours to  feparate,  what  he  calls,  the  Appendages 
to  the  Epifcopal  office,  from  the  powers  that  eflcn- 
tially  belong  to  it.     And  here  he  fays,  "  every  one 
knows,  that  the  office  of  a  Clergyman  is  the  lame, 
whether  he  is  pofTefled  of  a  Fortune,  or  is  without 
one  ;  whether  he   has  a  large  Pariffi,  or  a  fmall 
one".     And  io  ''  with  regard  to  place,  he  who  has 
a  fmall  Diocefs  has  the  Tame  Epifcopal  power,   as 
he  who  has  a  large  one  ♦,  and  it  matters  not,  as  to 
the  validity  of  the  ad,  whether  it  be  performed  by 
the  Biffiop  of  Man,  or  the  Arch-Billiop  of  Canter- 
bury".    The  queftion  is   not,  whether  thefe  and 
fuch  like  Appendages  to  the  Epifcopal-office  will 
be  deftrudtive  of  the  powers,  which,  by  the  infti- 
tution  of  Chrift,  effentially  belong  to  it  ;  but  whe- 
ther they  do  not  unfit  the  perfons  veiled  with   ic 
for  the  proper  difcharge  of  the  duties  of  it  ?  In- 
fomuch,  that  it  would  be  highly  unreafonable  to 
add  fuch  Appendages  to  the  office,  and  as  much 
fo  to  expedt,  if  they  are  added,  that  chriftian  pro- 
fcflbrs  diould  not  complain  of  it  as  an  mtolerable 
£  grievance; 


34     The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfvvcreda 

grievance.  If  it  "  matters  not,  as  to  the  validity 
of  the  a6l",  whether  a  Bilhop  has  a  fingle  congre- 
gation for  his  charge,  or  feveral  hundred,  it  cer- 
tainly does  as  to  his  capacity  to  ferve  the  great 
ends  of  his  office.  I  fiippofe  the  Dr.  would  not  fay, 
it  would  deftroy  the  "  validity"  of  a  Bifhop's  adt, 
was  he  an  univerfal  one,  as  the  Pope  is  -,  but  there 
are  few,  I  believe,  but  would  think  it  "  mattered 
much",  whether  there  was  fuch  a  Bifliop,  or  not. 
And  the  clothing  BifVsops  with  worldly  dignity  and 
power,  and  placing  them  at  the  head  of  large  Di- 
oceiTes,  is,  in  proportion,  the  fame  incongruity  ; 
and,  inftead  of  ferving  the  true  fpiritual  intereft  of 
the  Church  of  Chrift,  has  been  greatly  detrimental 
to  it  in  all  ages,  from  Confianrine  to  this  day  j 
and,  1  am  perfuaded,  will  ever  be  fo. 

The  Dr.  now  comes  to  the  confideration  of 
"  thofe  powers  that  are  peculiar  to  Bifhops,  and 
without  which  they  would  ceafe  to  be  Bifhops"  5 
and  thefe,  he  fays,  "'  will  be  found  to  be  the  powers 
oi gGvernnient^  ordination^  and  conjirmation^\ 

* 
He  begins  with  the  *'  pov/er  or  right  of  govern- 
ment", in  fupport  of  which  he  has  offered  three 
things^ 

One  Is,  that  "this  right  is  neceffarily  included 
\x\  the  fupcriority  of  their  office".  He  does  not 
here,  as  might  have  been  expeded,  in  fo  impor- 
tant a  matter,  go  into  the  confideration  of  the  na- 
ture of  this  office,  proving  herefrom  its  fupcriority, 
in  the  fenfe  he  affixes  to  this  word.  By  the  go- 
verning pov/er  he  would  make  effential  to  the 
Epifcopal  office,  he  means  a  monarchical  power, 
iuch  an  one  as  may  be  exercifed  without  fubordi- 

nate 


"The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered.     35 

nate  officers,  yea,  in  oppofition  to  them.  But, 
furely,  fuch  a  power  as  this  is  not  ''  necefTarily  in- 
cluded" in  meer  fuperiority  of  ofnce.  This  fu- 
periority  there  may  be,  and  this  there  has  been, 
and  now  is,  in  many  focieries,  where  the  pov;er  of 
the  higheft  office,  among  fubordinate  ones,  is  not 
the  power  of  an  ablolute  Monarch,  which  knows 
no  check  but  his  own  fovereign  pleafure.  No- 
thing therefore  is  yet  faid,  that  has  the  appearance 
gf  foiid  argument. 

Another  thing  is,  "  that  *his  power  was  con- 
veyed from  the  Apoftles  to  their  fucceflbrs,  the 
Bifhops  •,  that  it  was  exercifed  by  Timothy,  Titus, 
and  others  ^  and  that  it  has,  through  all  ages  of 
the  Church,  been  tranfmitted  down,  and  maintain- 
ed by  the  Epifcopal  order".  So  the  Dr.  fays,  with- 
out adding  one  word  by  way  of  proof.  It  is  very 
extraordinary,  when  he  undertook  to  fupport  the 
fuperiority  of  Biiliops  in  point  of  government,  and 
as  abfolute  Monarchs  toQ,  that  he  lliould  do  it  in 
a  didlatorial  manner  only  °,  as  though  his  affirma- 
tion would  be  efteemed  good  evidence  in  the  cafe. 
We  muft  have  a  much  better  argument  to  con- 
vince us,  that  the  exorbitant  power  he  claims  for 
Biihops  really  belongs  to  them,  than  barely  hi^ 
faying,  that  it  was  "  conveyed  to  them  by  the 
ApoSles,  and  has  been  exercifed  by  them  ever 
fince". 

The  lad  thing  is,  ,  the  Epiftles  to  the  (even 
Churches,  of  the  Lydian-Afia  ^  which,  fays  he, 
"  are  a  proof,  that  the  government  of  the  Chq#r- 
ches,  refpedivcly,  was  lodged  in  the  hands  office' 
gle  perfons,  who  are  called  Angels,  by  which  was 
meant  an4  intended,  according  to  the  voice 
E  2  t)f 


5<S     The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered. 

of  united   antiquity,  Bidiops   in   the  appropriated 
fcnfe".     Here  again  he  reds  this  eliential  affair  of 
the  government  of  Bilhops  upon  mecr  affirmation  •, 
though  he  could  not  but  know,  that   it  has  been 
proved,  at  lead  in  the  opinion  of  Non-Epifcopali- 
ans,  an  hundred  times,  that  thefe  "  Angels'*  were 
not  Bifhops,  "  in  his    appropriated   fenle".     This 
is  all,  however  ftrange  it  may  appear  to  thereaderj 
that  the  Dr.  has  been  pleafed  to  fay  in  defence  of 
that  fuper-intending,  abfolutely  m.onarchical  pov/er 
he  elTentiaily  conneels   v;ith   the  Epikopal  office. 
If  nothing  more  can  be  offered  in  proof  of  this 
claim,  it  is,  without  all  doubt,  an  unjudifiableone  ; 
and  we  may  juftly  look  upon  fuch  pov/er,  where- 
ever  exercifed,  as  a  real  ulurpation  ;  efpecially,  if 
the  two   following  paffages  of  fcripture,'  among 
many  others  that  might  be  mentioned,  are  attend- 
ed to.     The  firll  is  in  the  Ads  of  the   Apoftles, 
chap.  20.  17.  "  And  from  Miletus,  he  [Paul]  fenc 
to  Ephefus,  and  called   the  Elders  [Frefbuterous, 
the  t^refoyters]  of  the  Church".     It  follows,  ver, 
J£8.  ^^  Take  heed  to  your  felves,  and  to  all  the  fiock^ 
over  which  the  holy  Ghoft  hath   made  you  over- 
feers  [Epifcopous  Biiliops]   to  feed  [Poimainein] 
the  Church  of  God".     Two  things    are  here  cb- 
vioufly  difccrnable.     One  is,  that,  in    the  opinion 
of  the  apoillePaul,  Prtfoyters  and  Bifhops  are  one 
and  the  fame  officers  in  the  Church  ;  for  he  pro- 
mifcuoufly  makes  ufe  of  thefe  names,  in  the  fame 
difcourfe,  to  point  out  preclfely  jthe  fame   perfons. 
The  other  is,  that  the  v.'ork  proper  to  Prefbyters 
is  that  of"  feeding   the   fiock  of  God"  •,  an  allu- 
fion  to  the  bufinefs  of  Shepherds,  which  effentially 
includes  in  it  the   infpedtion  and   government  of 
the  Sheep  committed  to  their  care.     '^  To  feed", 
[Poimainein]  is  often  ufed  ^0  fignifie   the  whole 

duty 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered.     37 

duty  of  the  Governor  of  a  family,  and  of  thofe 
Governors  alfo  v/Ko  are  at  the  head  of  Kingdoms. 
In  Revel.  2.  27.  it  is  faid  of  Chrift,  in  his  charader 
as  *' Lord  of  air',  that  Poimanei  aiuous,  "  hefhali 
rule  them  [the  nations]  with  a  rod  of  Iron".  The 
other  text  of  facred  writ  is  that  in  Peter's  firft 
Epiftle,  5  th  chap,  firft  and  fecond  verfes,  "  The 
Elders  [Preibutcrous]  which  are  among  you  I  ex- 
hort, v/ho  am  alfo  an  Elder  ; — feed  [Poimanate] 
the  Church  of  God,  which  is  among  you,  taking 
the  overfight  thereof",  Epifcopountes,  adling  the 
part  of  Bilhops  towards  them.  It  is  plain,  from 
this  paffage,  that  the  work  of  inftrudting  and  go- 
verning the  Church  of  God  properly  belongs  to 
Prefbyters  :  Nor  could  it  v/ell  have  been  more 
plainly  and  fully  exprelTed  ;  for  they  are  not  only 
exhorted,  by  an  infpired  Pen,  to  "  feed  the  Church 
of  God"  ',  but  to  c5o  it,  Epifcopountes,  a6ling  in 
the  character,  and  performing  the  proper  work  of 
Bifhops  ;  which  furely  includes  government,  as 
well  as  inftrudlion.  It  governing  authority  is  nor^ 
in  thefe  texts,  committed  to  Prefbyters,  and  by 
apoRolic  inftitution  too,  there  are  no  words  in 
which  it  can  be  done.  Let  the  Dr.  produce  only 
a  fingle  paffage,  any  where  in  the  New  teftament, 
that  mentions  Biil"iops,  in  his  appropriated  fenfe, 
and  entrufls  them  with  the  affair  of  Church- 
Government,  and  we  will  then  acknowledge  he 
has  done  fomething  to  good  purpofe  j  which  we 
do  not  think  he  has  done  as  yet. 

Another  power  belonging  to  Bifhops,  fays  the 
Dr.  is  *'  ordination  •,  which  has  always  been  confi- 
dered  by  the  friends  of  Epifcopacy,  as  peculiar 
to  Bifhpps,  and  unalienable  from  their  office". 
He  does  not  here  fpeak  the  truth  of  fad,  even 

fince 


38     The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered. 

lince  the  fettlement  of  Eplfcopacy  in  England, 
after  the  reformation.  The  firft  reformers,  and 
hundieds  of  others,  all  along  from  their  day,  of 
high  dignity  in  the  Church,  and  the  heft  character 
for  piety  and  learning,  have  been  of  our  mind  as 
to  the  Identity  of  Bifhops  and  Prefbyters,  and  thac 
ordination  was  appropriated  to  Bifhops  by  human 
conftit'jtion  only. 

The  Dr.  goes  on,  *'  with  regard  to  the  power 
of  ordination,  none,  that  have  labored  in  the  caufe, 
have  been  able  to  fhew  from  fcripture  a  fmgle  in- 
(tance,  wherein  this  power  has  been  exerciled  by 
Trefbyters  only".  He  fhould  have  added,  in  his 
opinion  ;  for,  in  the  opinion  of  judges  far  more 
learned  in  the  fcriptures,  and  all  other  wrtings, 
than  he  or  I  can  modeflly  pretend  to  be,  inftances 
of  this  power  of  Preibyters  have  been  produced, 
and  fuch  asEpifcopalians  have  neveryet  been  able  to 
fet  afide.  He  fubjoins,  in  the  immediately  follow- 
ing words,  *'  but  there  are  many  inftances  in  which, 
thofe  who  are  manifeftly  fuperior  to  Preibyters  are 
found  to  have  ufed  it".  Let  him  give  us,  from 
the  fcripture,  if  he  can,  a  fingle  inftance  of  ordi- 
nation by  any  ordinary  fixed  ofHcer  in  the 
Church,  that  was  of  an  higher  order  than  thac  of 
Prefbyters,  It  is  certain,  though  we  have  exam- 
ples, in  fcripture,  of  ordination  by  extraordinary 
and  ordinary  officers,  by  Apoftles,  by  Evangelifts, 
by  Teachers,  or  common  Pallors  or  Preibyters  ; 
yet,  we  no  where  read,  throughout  the  New-tella- 
ment,  of  fo  much  as  one  ordination  by  any  perfon 
under  the  name  or  flile  of  a  Bifhop.  If  what  I  fay 
does  not  confift  with  exacl  truth,  the  millake  may 
be  eafily  Ihewn  ;  as  the  lacred  books  are  open  to 
every  one's  view. 

Ths 


The  Appeal  to  the  PabHc  anfvvered.     39 

The  Dr.  proceeds,  "as  to  the  cafe  of  Timothy, 
whom  St.  Paul  exhorts,  in  his  firft:  Epiftle  to  him, 
*'  not  to  negledt  the  gift  which  was  given  him  by- 
prophecy,  with  the  laying  on  of  the  hands  of  the 
Prefbytery",  it  will  not  anfwer  the  purpofe".  And 
why  ?  Becaufe  •'  in  his  fecond  Epiftle  to  him,  he 
exprefly  afTerts,  that  this  fame  gift  was  imparted 
to  him"  by  the  laying  on  of  his  own  hands'*.  But 
how  does  the  Dr.  know,  that  the  apoftle  Paul  is 
fpeaking  of  one  and  the  fame  gift,  in  both  thefe 
texts  ?  He  fhould  have  given  us  fome  proof  of 
his  knowledge,  as  to  this  point  ;  for  it  is  far  from 
being  certain,  that  the  fame  gift  is  fpoken  of  in  thefe 
different  Epiftles,  wrote  at  different  times.  Some 
of  the  beft  writers  think  it  moft  probable,that  diffe- 
rent gifts  are  meant  in  thefe  paflages.  But  ihould 
it  be  fuppofed,  not  granted,  that  the  fame  gifc 
is  fpoken  of  in  both  texts,  and  that  this  gift  was 
the  power  communicated  by  ordination,  how  does 
it  appear,  that  it  was  given  by  "  the  laying  on  of 
Paul's  hands"  only,  and  not  by  "  the  hands  of  the 
Prefbytery"  as  truly  ?  It  is  as  pofitively  faid,  in 
the  firft  Epiftle,  that  it  was  given  "  with  the  lay- 
ing on  of  the  hands  of  the  Prefbytery",  as  it  is,  la 
the  fecond,  that  it  was  "  by  the  laying  on  of  Paul's 
hands'*.  What  then  ?  Says  the  Dr.  "  obferve  the 
difference  between  by  and  with.  Timothy  re- 
ceived this  gift  "  BY  the  impofition  of  St.  Paul's 
hands",  as  being  effeftual  to  convey  it  ;  but  ic 
was  only  "  with  the  impofition  of  the  hands  of 
the  Prefbytery",  which  implies  not  any  power  in 
them,  but  their  concurrence  only".  Notably  faid  ! 
An  irrefragable  argument  truly  I  The  diftindlion 
the  Dr.  here  makes  between  the  juft  import  of  the 
prepofitions,  meta,  and  dia,  is  altogether  ground- 
lefs^  and  could  be  contrived  for  no  other  reafon 

than 


40     The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anrwefecl.' 

than  to  ferve  a  prefent  turn.  Thcfe  prepofition^ 
are  commonly  ufed,  in  the  New-teftamenr,  asi 
carrying  in  them  the  fame  force.  An  obfervable' 
inftance  of  this  we  have  in  the  15th  chap,  of  the 
Ads.  In  the  4th  ver.  it  is  faid  of  Paul  and 
Barnabas,  that  "  they  declared  all  things  God 
had  done  [meta]  with  them".  In  the  12th  ver. 
the  fame  thougnt  is  thus  expreffed,  they  '^  declared 
what  miracles  and  wonders  God  had  wrought  a-^ 
mong  the  Gentiles  [dia]  by  them'*.  The  prepo- 
fition,  meta,  in  the  4th  ver.  has  exa6lly  the  fame 
force  with  the  prepofition  dia  in  the  12th  ver.  and 
might,  with  equal  propriety,  have  been  rendered 
hy^  as  it  is  in  the  12th  ver.  An  inftrumental  effi- 
ciency is  the  thing  meant  in  both  places.  Many 
more  inilances  might  be  brought  of  the  like  ufe  of 
thefe  prepofitions,  but  that  it  would  take  up  more 
room  than  can  be  here  fpared.  The  Dr's  fug- 
gefting,  that  holy  orders  were  conveyed  to  Timo- 
thy, folely  hy  Paul's  hands,  in  virtue  of  the  force 
of  the  prepofition  dia  ;  while,  in  virtue  of  the  force 
of  the  word  meta,  wlth^  nothing  more  is  imported, 
by  the  impofition  of  the  hands  of  the  Prcfbyteryj 
than  their  concurring  with,  or  approbating  the 
apoftie  Paul's  adl,  which  wholly  comrnunicated  the 
power,  is  nothing  better  than  an  arbitrary  inven- 
tion to  fupport  a  finking  caufe.  In  this  view  of 
the  matter,  any  private  members  of  the  Church 
might  have  ''  laid  on  hands"  in  Timothy's  ordi- 
nation, with  as  much  pertinency  as  it's  Prefbyters. 
It  cannot,  with  the  lead  fhadow  of  reafon,  be  fup^ 
pofed,  that  an  infpired  Apoftie  would  have  called 
in  a  number  of  Prefbyters  to  join  with  him  in  the 
facred  folemnity  of  "  impofing  hands",  if  they  had 
no:  a  right,  as  officers  in  the  Church  of  Chrift,  to 
perform  this  adion  \  and  their  performing  it  is  a 

fure 


^he  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered.     41 

fure  argument  of  their  right  to.  do  the  thing  in«» 
tended  by  it,  that  is,  feparate  a  perfon  to  rhe 
work  of  the  Gofpel-miniitiy  :  As  they  that  have 
a  right  to  apply  water  in  the  nam:  of  the  Father^ 
and  the  Son,  and  the  holy  Ghoft,  have  a  right  to 
baptife  •,  and  they  that  have  a  right  to  kt  ap-^rc 
bread  and  wine,  and  didribute  it  to  the  people^ 
have  a  right  to  adminifter  the  Lord's  fi.pper, 

I  CA.NN0T  help  obferving  here,  if  it  had  been 
in  the  Dr's  power  to  have  turned  us  to  a  texc  of 
fcripture^  in  which  it  is  declared,  that  the  minifle- 
rial  gift  was  given  "  v/ith  [meta]  the  laying  on 
of  the  hands  of  the  Episcopate,  he  would  have 
triumphed  in  it,  as  a  decifive  argument  in  his 
favor.  And  fhould  it  have  been  obje6ted,  that 
this  gift  was  alfo  iaid  to  be  given  "  by  [dia]  the 
laying  on  of  the  hands  of  Paul",  and  that,  in  con- 
fideration  of  ihe  peculiar  force  of  the  prepofition 
BY  [dia]  HE  it, was  that  conveyed  the  gift  ;  but 
that  the  Episcopate  only  fignified  their  concur- 
rence in  the  affaif  ;  I  fay,  fhould  fuch  an  objecliorl 
have  been  made,  I  doubt  not,  it  would  have  beea 
attributed  to  a  "  wrangling  captious  difpofition"^ 
not  to  fay  any  thing  worfe. 

It  is  added,  in  the  next  following  words>  "  Sti 
Paul  could  have  ordained  without  their  concur- 
rence, but  the  impofition  of  their  hands  would 
have  been  altogether  unavailable  without  his". 
We  fay,  on  the  contrary,  and  our  bare  word  carries 
as  much  convincing  weight  with  it  as  their's,  thac 
this  Prefbyterian-confiftory  might  have  ordained 
Timothy  without  the  apoftle  Paul,  as  he  might 
have  done  it  without  them  ;  and,  in  either  cale, 
the  ordination  would  have  been  valid  to  all  the 
I?  purpole.^ 


42     The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered, 

purpofes  of  the  Gofpel-miniftry.  If  the  pafTioii 
of  fhame,  excited  in  the  Dr.  had  operated  with 
a  litrlt  more  flrength,  he  vould  not,  by  "  repeat- 
ing things  which  have  been  fo  frequently  faid  by 
others",  have  made  it  neceffary  that  we  alfo  fhould 
do  the  fame* 

He  has  feen  fit  to  fay  only  two  things  more,  iA 
fupport  of  the  peculiar  unalienable  right  of 
BiHiops,  in  the  appropiiated  fenfe,  to  ordain. 

The  firft  is,  that  "  no  inflance  of  ordination^ 
performed  by  meer  Trefbyters,  can  be  found  in  the 
Church  for  feveral  ages.  Aerius  &  Colluthus,  in 
the  fourthCentury,  feem  to  have  been  the  firft  con- 
trivers of  ordinations  of  this  fort".  So  we  were 
told  in  a  book,  intituled  '*  a  modeft  proof  of  the 
Government  fettled  by  Chrift  and  his  Apoftles  in 
the  Church",  publifhed  here  and  difperled  about 
forty  years  ago  ;  which  was  foon  anfwered  by  the 
late  worthy  Dr.  Wigglefworth,  and  in  fo  maiterly 
a  way,  in  his  "  fober  remarks",  that  this  blufter- 
ing  pretence  has  lain  dorment  ever  fince  ;  and  it 
would  have  been  more  to  the  Dr's  honor  to  have 
fuffered  it  to  continue  in  this  ftate  of  oblivion,  than 
to  have  revived  it  with  only  a  bare  mention  of  it, 
and  refering  his  readers  to  "Hooker'sEcclef  Polity, 
and  Arch-Bifnop  Potter's  very  excellent  difcourfe  of 
Chuich-government".  Epiphanius  was  the  firft 
that  found  fault  with  Aerius,  ftigmatifing  him  as 
an  Pleretrc.  And  why  did  he  thus  condemn  him  ? 
Was  it  only  or  meerly  for  his  opinion  concerning 
the  parity  of  Bifhops  and  Preft^yters  ?  Far  from  it. 
He  zealoufly  oppofed  the  lawfulnefs  of  praying 
FOR  THE  DEAD.  Epiphanius  was  a  ftickler  for 
this  rank  fuperftition,  now  coming  into  practice, 

and 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered.     42, 

and  could  not  bear  to  have  it  expofed.  The  He- 
refies  therefore  he  taxed  Aerius  with,  were  the 
Identity  of  Bifhops  and  Prefbyters,  and  the  un^ 
lawfulnefs  of  praying  for  the  dead  ;  Here- 
fies,  as  Dr.  Wigglefworth  writes,  "  of  much 
"  the  fame  nature,  and  Epiphanius's  confutation 
"  of  them  both  equally  learned  and  fatisfadlory  : 
^*  For  it  is  obfervable,  that,  in  the  fame  place, 
*^  where  he  condemns  that  monftrous  Herefy  of 
*'  the  Identity  of  order,  he  fairly  confefTes,  "  that, 
^'  by  the  tv/o  orders  of  Prefbyters  and  Deacons,  all 
.*'  Ecclefiaftieal  offices  might  be  performed".  To 
"  this  I  fliall  only  add  the  words  of  the  learned 
"  Dr.  Stillmgfleet,  who  fays,  if  Aerius  was  aa 
*'  Heretic  for  holding  the  Identity  of  arder^  it  is 
^'  ftrange  that  Epiphanius  fhould  be  the  firft  man 
^'  that  fhould  charge  him  with  it  ;  and  that  neither 
*'  Socrates,  Sozoman,  Theodoret,  nor  Evagrius, 
*'  before  whofe  time  heJiv,ed,fliould  cenfure  him  for 
*'  it.  And  why  fhould  notjerom  have  been  equally 
*'  animadverted  upon,  who  is  as  exprefs  in  this  as 
*■'  any  man  in  the  world".  *  There  was  no  need, 
nor  any  reafon,  to  pmColIui bus  whhJerius  ;  for  he 
did  not  aft  in  the  capacity  of,  what  Epifcopalians 
would  call,  a  mcer  Prefbyter,  in  the  bufinefs  of 
&rdaining  ;  but  as  a  Bifhop.  Dr.  SriHingfieet  has 
proved,  fiom  Blondel's  apology,  that  he  was  a 
Bifhop  of  the  Melecian  parry  in  Cynus,  and  is 
fuppofed  to  have  been  ordained  a  Bifhop  by  Me* 
letius.  -f 

As  the  Dr.  has  been  pkafed  to  fay,  "  no  inflancc 

of  an  ordmation  by  meer  Prefbyters  can  be  four.d 

F  2  in 

*  Sober  remarks,  pag.  4,  5.  t  Vid.  Irenicum, 

pag.     381  i — and    more    largely  Blondci's    a^oiogy^ 
Seel.  3.  from  317,  to  327, 


^    The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered* 

in  the  Church  for  feveral  ages",  vve  might  natu- 
|*ally  conclude  there'  are  numerous  examples  ot; 
Epilcopal  ordination  in  '  thefe  feveral  ages.  We 
ihould  take  it  kindly  to  nave  pointed  out  to  us  fo 
much  as  one  inltanccg  within  the  Jong  period  of 
an  hundred  and  fifty  years  from  Lhiill,  of  an  or- 
dination by  any  Bifliop,  in  a'ny  part  of  the  chriftian 
Y^orld  i  meaning  by  a  Bifhop,  an  cflicer  in  ihe 
Church  of  a  fuperior  order  to  that  of  Prefbyters. 
I  have  lately  t)cen  locking  over  the  extrafts  I  made 
twenty  years  ago,  from  the  fathers  of  the  twofirll 
Centuries,  containing  every  thing  in  their  writings 
fhat  might  be  thought  to  have  relation  to  the  pre- 
fent  controverfy  ;  and  I  don't  find  a  fingle  exam- 
ple of  an  ordination  by  Biil-iops,  in  the  appropri- 
ated fenfe,  within  the  time  be  tore  fpecifted,  If  the 
Dr.  v/ould  preftnt  us  with  one  from  his  own  know- 
ledge, or  by  communication  from  the  convened 
body  that  api-ointed  him  to  write,  it  would  be,  to 
ine,  a  great'  favor,  as  hereby  1  might  fill  up  an 
^ffential  vacancy  in  my  extracts,  and  render  them 
quite  pcrft(ft  i  And,  befides  it's  being  a  graiiaca= 
tion  to  me,  it  would  be  a  vail  help  to  the  Epifco- 
pal  caufe,  and,  in  a  good  mealure,  juflifie  the  Chal- 
lenge, prelaikal  writers  fcmeiimes  triumphantly* 
make,  calling  upon  their  opponents  to  give  an  in- 
fiance  of  Ffefbyijrrian-orclinatipn  for  Ipme  Cea- 
turies. 

The  other  thing,  with  which  the  Dr,  fanifhe^ 
what  he  though;  proper  to  fay  upon  the  head  of 
prdinarion,  is,  that  ''  from  this  time,  [the  fourth 
Century]  until  after  the  beginning  of  the  refor- 
mation in  the  fixteenth  Century,  no  inltances  wor- 
thy of  notice  occur  to  favor  ordination  by  Prefby- 
$ers".     He  had  before  faidj  Aenus  and  Colluthu^ 

wer^ 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  aufwered,     45 

were  the  firft  contrivers   of  ordination  by  Prefby- 
ters  ;  fo  that,  according  to  him,  there  were  no  in* 
fiances  in  this  kind   until  the  fourth  Century,  the 
2ge  in  which  they   lived.     How  does  this   agree 
v/ith  the  account  of  Eutichius,  who-  fays,  "  thac 
ihe  twelve  Prefbyters  conftituted  by  Mark,  in  the 
See  of  Alexandria,  chofe  out  one  of  their  number 
to  be  head  over  the  reft,  and  the  other  eleven,  laid 
hands  on  hmi,  and   blelTed  him,  and   made  him 
Patriarch"  ? — Or  with  the  account,  Jerom,  more 
ancient  than  he,  has  given  us  of  the  fame  fadt, 
faying,  *'  at  Alexandria,  from  St.  Mark  to  Hera- 
clius  and  Dionyfius,  Bifhops,  the  Priefts   alv/ays 
icook  one  out  from  among  tliemfclves,  whom  they 
fet  in  the  higheft  fear^  and  called  Billiop,  juft  as  an 
army  makes  an   Emperor,  or  as  if  the  Deacons 
lliould  chufe  one  out  of  their  number,  and  call 
him  an  Arch-.Deacon"  ?  Thefe  are  inftances  that 
are  to  be  met  with  in  moft  writers  on  our  fide  of 
the  queftion;     A  great  variety  of  cafes  alfo,  in  proof 
of  Prefbyterian- ordination,  within  the  time  fpecified 
by  the  Dr.  may  be  fcen  m  Dr.  Siillingfleet's  Iren- 
icum,  pag.  374.  and  onwards.     Pie  is  cgregioufly 
miltakcn  iikcwife  in  faying,  that,  from  the  fourth 
Century,  until  the  beginning  of  the   reformation 
in  the  fixteenth,  ''  no  inftances  worthy  of  notice 
occur  to  favor  ordination  by  Prcfoyters".     What 
he  may  think  worthy  of  notice  I  cannot  tell  •,  but 
ordinations,  in  this  kmd,  were  comlrjon  many  ages 
"before  the  reformation  he  fpeaks  of,  and  as  worthy 
of  fpecial  notice  as  any  Epilcoapal  ones  fince.  *     I 

would 

^  Says  Mr,  Daniel  Williamf?,  in  his  preface  to  Mr.  J. 
Owen's  p!ea  for  fcripture-ordination,  "  the  ancient 
Vaudois,  orWaldenGjs,  thofe  eminent  and  faithful  wit- 
m^^^?  ^pinil  ?aUi5hnfti^n  ufyrpatioi^Sj  have  had  no  or- 

diiiatioiij 


4^     The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered. 

would  here  afk  the  Dr.  in  the  words  of  that  emi- 
nently learned  man,  the  late  reverend  Mr  Thomas 
."Walter  of  Roxbury,  "  whether  the  Vaudois  of 
*'  Piedmont  were  not  much  ancienter  than  two 
*'  hundred  years  ?  Leger  has  fufficiently  demon- 
**  ftrated  their  antiquity,  and  proved,  that  the 
*^  Waldenfes  were  long  before  the  time  of  Peter 
*'  Valdo,  which  name  (as  they  are  now  called 
*'  Vaudois  from  the  word  Vaux,  that  fignifies  a 
"valley)  belonged  to  them  as  inhabiting  the 
'*  vallies  of  the  Alps.  We  will  take  their  cha- 
*'  rader  and  hiftory  from  a  fworn  enemy  of  their's, 
"  from  Claudius  Seflelius,  the  Arch-Bifhop  of 
*'  Turin,  in  a  book  which  he  wrote  againlt  them. 
"  There  he  tells  us,  "  that  the  feat  of  the  Wal- 
*•  denfes  took  its  rife  from  a  mod  religious  perfon, 
*'  called  Leo,  that  lived  in  the  time  of  Conitantine 
*'  rhe  great,  and  who,  detefting  the  covetoufnefs 
*'  of  Pope  Sylvefter,  and  the  immoderate  bounty 
*'  of  Conftantine,  chofe  rather  to  embrace  poverty 
*•  with  the  fimplicity  of  the  chriftian  faiih,  than 
*'  with  Sylvefter  to  be  defiled  with  fat  and  rich 
*^  benefices  ;  and  that  all  they  who  were  feriouily 

^'  religious, 

dinations  but  by  Prcfbyters  for  five  hundred  years  pad, 
Hiftory  of  the  Vaudois,  chap.  3.  The  fiift  guides  of 
the  people  from  myfticai  Egypt  v/ere  Prefbyters  or- 
dained byPrtfbyters.  Thefe  aie  they  that  gathered  the 
iirfL-fruits  unto  God, — They  have  gone  in  mourning 
from  generation  to  generation. — They  have  been  fore 
broken  in  the  place  ot  dragons,  and  covered  with  the 
fliadow  of  death  ;  yet  have  they  not  forgotten  the 
name  of  their  God,  or  Wretched  out  their  hand  to  a 
ftrange  God.  it  is  by  the  miniftry  of  thefe  that  the 
truth  prevailed,  the  eyes  of  nations  were  opened,  and 
vaft  multitudes  reduced  to  the  obedience  of  the  gofpeh 
They  fealed  their  minifttv  v/ith  xheir  blood,  and  hea- 
ven fealed  it  with  the  m oft  gloiious  faccefs". 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered.     47 

*'  religious,  joined  themfelves  unto  them".  Alfo 
*'  RequerusSacco,  the  celebrated  inquifnor,  quoted 
*'  by  the  Jefoic  Cretzer,  in  his  Bibliotheque  of  the 
*'  fathers,  aflerts,  "  that  among  all  tiie  ie6ts  there 
*'  is  none  that  has  been  fo  pernicious  to  the  Church 
*'  of  Rome,  as  that  of  the  Leonifts,  becaufe  it -is 
*'  the  mofl  ancient^  and  has  continued  longeft  : 
•'  For  fome  affirm,  that  it  began  in  the  time  of 
*'  Sylvefter,  and  others  fay,  m  the  time  of  the 
"  Apoftles".  The  Fryar  Belvedoras,  excufing  the 
*'  MifTionaries  for  their  not  converting  one  of 
*'  thefe  Waldenfes,  affigns  this  reafon  for  it,  "  that 
•'  their  Herefie  was  too  firmly  rooted  for  any  to  be 
•'  able  to  do  good  among  them  :  They  of  the 
"  Valleys  have  been  always,  and  through  all  times, 
"  accounted  Heretics".  *  So  that,  upon  the 
whole,  the  Dr's  "  uniform  pradlice  of  the  Church 
for  fifteen  hundred  years",  is  as  dettiture  of  evi- 
dence from  antiquity,  as  the  necefiity  of  Epifcopal 
ordination  is  from  the  fcripcures. 

He  now  comes  to  the  lad  br.anch  of  the  Epif- 
copal office,  "  impofition  of  hands  in  confirmati- 
on" ;  concerning  which,  after  explaming  the  na- 
ture and  defign  of  this  rite,  he  fays,  "  the  Church 
of  England  declares,  that  it  hath  been  a  folemn, 
ancient  and  laudable  cuftom,  continued  from  the 
Apofiles  time".  And  here  his  reafoning  is  emi- 
nently curious.  "  If  this  cuftom  has  been  from 
the  Apoftles,  it  mufl:  have  been  pra61:ired  in  their 
time  ;  for,  in  the  language  of  the  fchools,  the 
terminus  a  quo  h  \n  the  time  of  the  Apo- 
ftles. And  it  can  with  no  propriety  be  faid  to 
have  been  continued  from  their  time,  if  it  com- 
menced 

*  Walter's  Reply  to  the  difcourfe  of  Epifcopacy,  pag. 
^  U,  83. 


48     The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwercd,- 

me  need  aftei-  it".  Demonftrably  argued  !  But  to 
what  purpoie  ?  May  it  not  be  true,  that  this  was 
a  cuftom  neither  in  the  Apoftles  days,  nor  within 
the  truly  primitive  times^  though  it  be  granted  the 
Church  or  England  fays  *'  ir  continued  from  rhe 
Apoftles  times''  ;  and  if  fo,  thac  it  was  their  judg;- 
menr,  in  ccnfequence  of  the  Dr's  learned  reafoning, 
that  it  was  in  ufe  by  the  Apoftles  themfelves  ?  Is 
infallibility  the  peculiar  priviledge  of  this  Church  ? 
Will  it  afcertain  the  truth  of  a  difputed  ht\^  to  fay 
the  Church  of  England  aHirms  it  to  be  one  ^  Some 
farther  proof  is  neceffary.  The  Dr.  feems  fenfible 
of  It,  and  goes  on  to  "  fee  what  information  the 
fcriprure  gives  us,  relating  to  this  fubjrd.*'.  And 
he  particularly  mentions  three  texts  to  his  purpofe. 

The  firfl:  is^  A(5ls  S.  14—17.  which  gives  an 
account  of  Peter  and  John  as  fent  to  Samaria,  who, 
when  they  were  come,  '*  prayed  for  them  that  they 
might  receive  the  holy  Ghoft  ;  and  laying  their 
hands  on  them,  they  received  the  holy  Ghod". 
Thefe  words,  fays  the  Dr.  "  exadly  defcnbe  confir- 
mation as  pradifed  in  the  Church  of  England,  and 
there  is  hardly  room  for  a  poffibility  of  applying 
them  to  any  thing  tW\  It  is  as  evident  as  words 
can  well  make  it,  that  the  impofition  of  hands  by 
the  Apollles,  fpoken  of  in  this  text,  was  for  the  im- 
partation  of  the  holyGhoft  in  miraculous  gifts. 
For  it  is  faid  of  Simon  the  forcerer,  ver.  13.  that  he 
*'  wondered,  beholding  the  miracles  and  figns  which 
were  done"  ^  and,  in  the  18th  ver.  that  *'  when  he 
faw,  that,  through  the  laying  on  of  the  Apoftles 
hands,  the  holy  Ghoft  was  given",  that  is,  a  power 
to  do  thofe  miracles  and  figns,  "  he  offered  them 
money,  faying,  give  me  alfo  this  power,  that  on 
whomioever  I  lay  hands,  he  may  receive  the  holy 

Ghoft", 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfvverec!.     49? 

Ghofl",  that  is,  the  ability  of  working  wonders; 
Will  the  Dr.  in  Ibber  fenoufnefs,  fay,  that  there  is 
any  likenefs  between  the  impofition  of  a  Bifliop's 
hands  in  confirmation,  and  this  laying  on  of  the 
Apoftles  hands,  as  to  it's  ufe  and  end  ?  Was  any 
miraculous  power  ever  conveyed,  in  this  way,  by 
any  Bidiop  of  the  Church  of  England  to  any  one 
his  hands  were  laid  upon  ?  Does  any  Bifhop,  fince 
the  days  of  Poperyj  pretend  to  impart  this  power  ? 
Why  then  is  this  text  brought  in  proof  of  the 
dodrine  of  confirmation  ?  Might  it  not  be  rea- 
fonably  thought,  that  prejudice  itfelf  could  not 
find  a  pOiTibility  of  applying  it  to  this  purpofe  ? 

The  fecond  text  is  that  in  A6ls  20.  7.  whicK 
contains,  fays  the  Dr.  "  another  inftance  of  confir- 
mation in  the  difciples  at  Ephefus,  on  whom,  *'  after 
ihey  were  baptifed",  St,  Paul  "  laid  his  hands,  and 
the' holy  Ghoft  came  upon  them'*.  He  has  here 
fhamefully  (topt  (hort  in  the  middle  of  a  fentence^' 
keeping  out  of  fight  a  neceflTary  part  of  it.  For 
it  follows  immediately,  and  in  order  to  finifh  the 
fentence,  "  and  they  spake  with  Tongues,  and 
PROPHESIED**.  Is  this  fair  ?  Does  it  carry  the 
appearance  of  that  impartial  uprightnefs,  which, 
becomes  every  honed  writer  ?  Can  any  imaginable 
reafon  be  afligned  for  his  thus  curtailing  the  text^ 
but  only  this,  that  if  he  had  given  it  in  whole,  ic 
would  have  been,  at  once,  vifible  to  his  readers^ 
that  it  was  nothing  to  his  purpofe  ?  And  this  will 
always  be  the  truth,  until  it  appears,  that  baptifed 
perfons,  upon  a  Bifhop*s  laying  his  hands  on  them, 
are  able  to  "  fpeak  with  tongues,  and  prophefie". 

The  lad  text  is  that  in  the  Epiflle  to  the  He- 
brews, chap.  6.  ver.  2.  where,  it's  author,  among 
Other  things,  fpeaks  of  "  the  laying  on  of  hands". 
G  .We 


50     The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered. 

We  read  of  the  Apoilles,  as  "  laying  on  their 
hands**  in  the  following  cafes  ;  in  ordination,  in 
healing  the  fick,  and  in  conveying  miraculous 
powers  ;  but  in  no  other  that  I  can  rccolledl  at 
preknt.  In  whichfoever  of  ihefe  fenfes  "  the  lay- 
ing on  of  hands"  is  here  underllood,  it  makes  no- 
thing to  the  Dr's  purpofe. 

He  takes  notice  of  two  objedlions  againft  what 
he  had  offered,  from  fcripturc,  in  proof  of  this  rite 
of  confirmation. 

One  is,  that  "  thefe  inflances  prove  only  what 
was  adually   pradifed   by  the  Apoftles,   but   not 
that  this  rite  was  intended  to  be  of  ftandmg  ufe  to 
the  Church  in  all  ages".     And,  in  reply,  he  round- 
ly affirms,  that  ''  confirmation  was  praitifed  by  the 
IMMEDIATE  fucceffors  of  the  Apoflles,   and  has 
been  universa'lli^  continued  through  all  the 
ages  of  the  Church,  until  within   thefe  two  Cen-^ 
turies"  y  and  that  this  "  muH:  be   confeiTcd  by  all 
that  have  the  least  acquaintance  with  Eccle- 
fiaftical  hiftory".     This  is  not   the  firfl  time  the 
Dr.  has  difcovered  his  want   of  knowledge  in  the 
ancient  writings  ',  nor  the  firfl:  time  he  has,  vAih 
great  afTurance,  declared  that  to  be  true^  which  o- 
thers  know  to  be  falfe.     It  is  well  known  to  thofe, 
who  are  tolerably  verfed  in  antiquity,  though  the 
Dr  feems  quite  ignorant  of  it,  that  no  instance 
of  confirmation  is  to   be  met  with,  in  any  of  the 
writings  of  the  fathers,  until  towards  the  clofe  of 
the  fccond,  or  rather  the   coming  in  of  the    third 
Century.     I  now  tell  him  what  may  appear  a  new 
and  flrange   thing  to  him,  that  Tertullian  is    the 
olclefl  father  who  fpeaks  of  this  rite  of  confirma- 
tion 5  and  I  could  tell  him  of  feveral  other  fuper- 

ftitious 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwercd.     51 

(lifious  rites  that  were,  by  this  time,  brougKi  into 
prafl'ce.  And  if  he  will  be  at  the  pains  to  conlulc 
Mr.  Pierce's  vindication  of  DiiTcnters,  or  the  diffm- 
ting  Gentleman's  anfwer  to  White,  he  wiii  fi-d, 
that  confirmation,  in  thofe  days,  was  always  per- 
formed, not  as  it  is  in  the  Church  of  E:iglaud,  but: 
liMMEDiATELY  after  Baptiim. 

The  other  objeflion  the  Dr.  con  fide  rs  is,  "  th^t 
from  the  inftances  of  confirmation  he  ihould  have 
faid,  of  the  laying  on  of  the  Ap)ftles  hands  i  re- 
corded in  fcripture,  the  efiedsof  it  appear  to  have 
been  miraculous  -,  and  as  the  power  of  miracles 
has  long  fince  ceafed,  this  rite  is  now  ufelefs,  and 
ought  not  to  be  continued".  Bur,  fays  he,  "  trie 
folucion  of  this  objedion  is  not  difRcuit".  How 
then  docs  he  folve  it  ?  V/hy,  by  cautioufly  avoid- 
ing to  fay  any  thing  upon  it  that  is  really  to  the 
purpofe.  For  though  he  fays,  miraculous  gifts 
were  imparted  by  the  impofition  of  the  Apoltles 
hands,  and  other  gifts  alfo  of  a  different  nature^ 
meaning  hereby  ''  the  gracious  afllftances  of  the 
holy  Spirit,  without  which  it  is  as  certain  now,  as 
it  ever  v/as,  that  no  man  can  fulfd  the  conditions 
of  the  Gofpcl-covenant"  ;  yet  he  does  not  venture 
to  go  on,  and  afHrm,  that  either  of  thefe  gifts  are 
imparted  by  Bifhops  to  thofe,  upon  vvh  )m  rhe-y  lay 
their  haadb  in  confirmation  ;  or  that  Blfnops  have, 
or  pretend  to  have,  in  thefe  days,  this  power  of 
communicadon.  And  if  they  have  no  power  to 
impart  the  holy  Ghofl,  either  in  miraculous  gifts, 
or  gracious  alTiftances,  why  fl^ould  they  ufe  thac 
rite  or  ceremony  by  which  the  Appflles  did  this  ?• 
*'  Might  they  not  as  well,  to  fpeak  here  in  the 
v/ords  of  an  excellent  wriierj  *  ftrctch  themfelves 
G.  2  *-'poi^ 

«  I>ifrent.  Gentleraans  anfw'er  to  White,  p^s-  45- 


'52     The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered. 

upon  the  dead  body  of  a  child,  in  imitation  of 
Elifha  •,  or,  make  oi.  tment  with  fpiale  for  the 
cure  of  the  blind,  in  imitation  of  our  Savior  ;  or, 
anoint  the  fickwith  oil,  in  imitation  of  the  apofto- 
lic  Elders  ;  as  pray,  and  lay  their  hands  on  thofe 
'who  were  baptifed,  in  imitation  of  Peter  and  John, 
who  did  this  to  the  Samaritan  converts  only  that 
they  might  receive  the  miraculous  gifts  and  powers 
pftbeholyGhoft"? 

I  SHALL  finifli  what  I  have  to  fay,  upon  this 
head  of  confirmation,  by  addrefilng  to  the  Dr.  in 
the  language  of  the  above  quoted  author  to  Mr. 
White,  "  By  the  order  of  your  common  prayer, 
*'  all  perfons  baptifed,  when  they  come  to  compc- 
**'  tent  years,  and  are  able  to  fay  the  Lord's  prayer, 
*'  Creed,  and  ten  Commandments,  and  the  anfwers 
*'  of  'the  fhort  Catechifm,  are  to  be  brought  to  con- 
**  formation".  The  Bifhop  having  afked,  "  whe^ 
*^  thcr  they  renew  the  folemn  piomife  and  vow 
*•  which  was  made  in  their  names  m  baptifm'"', 
♦'  &c  5  upon  their  anfwer,  "  we  do",  proceeds 
*^  hereupon  to  declare,  in  the  mod  folemn  iTjan- 
*'  ner,  even  in  an  addrefs  to  God  himfelf,  "  that 
**  he  has  vouchfafed  to  regener^ite  thefe  his  fervants 
*'  by  water  and  the  holy  Ghost,  (note  :  Net 
^'  by  water  only,  but  alio  by  the  koly  Gkost) 
^^  and  to  give  them  ih^  fcr give nefs  of  all  their  fins'^ : 
*'  And  laying  his  hand  upon  each  particular  per- 
^'  fon,  '^  he  CERTIFIES  him  by  that  fign  of  God's 
*'  favor  and  gracious  goodnefs  towards  him".  I 
*'  pray  you,  Sir,  in  the  name  of  God,  inform  me, 
*'  what  wairant  has  the  Bifl^op  to  pronounce  a 
•'  man's  fms  Ahh  forgiven,  and  himfelf  re- 
♦'  GENERATED  by  the  HOLY  Ghost,  upon  no  o- 
J*  ther  grounds  than  his  being  able  to  fay  the  fhorc 

*'  CateghifPa 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered.     53 

**  Catechifm,  and  declaring  that  he  ftands  by  his 
*'  baptifmal  engagements  ?  Will  you  fay  that  this 
*'  is  the  chriltian  dodrine  concerning  the  terms 
"  of  acceptance  and  forgivenefs  with  God  ? — Are 
*'  there  not  n:iultitudes  who  call  Chrift  their  Lord, 
*'  and  publicly  profefs  to  (land  by  their  baptifmal 
*'  covenant,  whom  yet  he  will  reje6t  with  abhor- 
*'  rence  at  lad  ?  You  will  then  inform  me.  Sir, 
^'  how  his  Lordfhip,  upon  this  meer  profeflion  and 
*'  promife,  prefumes  to  declare  to  almighty  God, 
"  and  to  ASSURE  the  perfon,  that  he  is  regene- 
**  RATED,  FORGIVEN,  and  without  all  peradven- 
"  ture  in  a  ftate  of  favor  with  heaven  !  The  ex- 
"  prefllons,  you  mull  acknowledge,  are  couched 
*'  in  abfolute  and  ftrong  terms  :  Nor  do  I  find 
*'  that  there  is  any  intmiation,  that  their  forgive- 
"  nefs  depends  upon  their  care  to  keep,  and  to 
"  live  up  to,  their  baptifmal  engagements.  No  : 
*«  But  though  their  whole  life  hath  hitherto  beea 
*'  fcandaloufly  corrupt  \  yet  upon  their  being  able 
''  to  fay  the  Lord's  prayer,  &c.  the  Bifhop  fo- 
*'  lemnly  pronounces  a  mod  abfolute  pardon  over 
"  them  ;  appeals  to  almighty  God  that  he  hath 
*'  forgiven  them  all  their  fins  ;  and  left  this  fhould 
"  be  too  little  to  fatisfie  the  doubting  finner,  and 
*'  qqaih  his  upbraiding  confclence,  he  lays  his  hand 
*'  upon  his  head, and  certifies  him,  by  that  fign, 
"  of  God's  favor  and  goodnefs  to  him. — To  me, 
"  Sir,  I  afTure  you,  this  appears,  I  do  not  fay  a 
*'  very  lliocking,  but  1  muft  fay  a  very  unaccoun- 
"  table  folemnity  ;  and  fhould  be  glad  to  know 
*'  how  to  reconcile  it  to  the  reverence  you  owe  to 
"  God,  or  to  the  faithfulnefs  and  charity  due  to 
^*  the  fouls  of  men. — Whether  the  continuance  of 
«'  this  ceremony,  in  it's  prefenc  form  of  admini- 
J'  ftration,  be  either  for  the  honor  of  the  admini- 

^'  ftrator. 


54    The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered. 

"  ftrator,  or  for  the  benefit  of  the  Church  ?-^ 
«' Whether  it  hath  not  an  apparent  tendency  to 
"  cherifh  a  delufive  hope,  and  to  fpeak  peace  to 
^*«  fuch  peribns  as  are  not,  by  the  chriftian  cove- 
*'  nant,  entitled  to  peace  ?  1,  with  all  humility, 
*'  leave  to  the  confideraiion  of  thofe  whom,  I 
"  thank  God,  it  more  immediately  concerns  than 
*'  my  felf  •,  who  are  to  watch  for  fouls  as  thofe 
^'  who  muft  give  an  account  to  the  great  Shep- 
"  HERD,  who  will  {hortly  come  -,  before  whom  it 
"  will  be  a  tremendous  thmg  to  have  the  immortal 
"  fouls  of  THOUSANDS  required  at  their  hands".  * 


*  DifTenting  Gentleman's  anfwer  to  White,  pag.  46^ 
4S,  173- 


MMX):(XX)^)i(XK5:(XXX^X):^X)^M)^>:(XX 


ANSWER 


'^y^:^My^:^^^:^x?^yo^^ 


ANSWER  to  Section  III.  which  declares, 
the  Church  in  America,  without  an  Epifco- 
pate,  is  necefTarily  deftitute  of  a  regular  Go- 
vernment, and  cannot  enjoy  the  Benefits  of 
Ordination  and  Confirmation^ 


THE  defign  of  the  Dr.  in  this  Se6lion,  is,  to 
fet  before  the  Public  the  "  wretched  con- 
dition" of  the  Epifcopal  Churches  in  the  Colonies 
*'  for  want  of  Bifhops'*.  And  it's  lamentably  bad 
ftate  lies  in  thls^  pag.  27.  that  "  if,  according  to  the 
dodrine  and  belief  of  the  Church  of  England, 
none  have  a  right  to  govern  the  Church  but  Bi- 
Ihops,  nor  to  ordain,  nor  to  confirm  ;  then  the 
American  Church,  while  without  Bifiiops,  mufl  be 
without  Government,  without  Ordination  and 
Confirmation". 

As  to  confirmation,  it  is  acknowledged,  they 
muft  be  in  want  of  it  without  Bifhops,  becaufe 
they  only  can  perform  this  piece  of  fervice,  con- 
formably to  the  eftablifhed  order  of  the  EngliHi 
Church.  But  this,  though  a  "  great  grievance'*, 
is  yet  paflfed  over  without  "  enlargement",  as  not 
being  futed,  I  fuppofe,  to  the  Colony-tafte,  and 
the  other  "  more  important  points  of  Government 
and  Ordmation"  immediately  proceeded  to,   and 

diftinaiy 


5(5    The  Appeal  to  the  Public  aniwered. 

diftindlly  confidered.  I  fhall  follow  the  Dr.  in  his 
own  way.  Only,  before  1  come  to  take  notice  of 
what  he  has  offered  upon  thefe  "more  important" 
heads,  i  fliall  not  think  it  needkfs  to  make  the 
two  following  remarks* 

The  firfl:  relates  to  thefe  words,  pag.  27.  "  ac- 
cording to  the  do6lrine  and  belief  of  the  Church 
of  England,  NONE  have  a  right  to  govern  the 
Church  but  Biihcps".  It  is  added,  in  a  marginal 
note  here,  "  the  reader  will  obferve,  that  only  fuch 
authority  is  fpoken  of  as  is  purely  Ecclefialtical, 
and  peculiar  to  the  officers  of  the  Church.  The 
King's  fupremacy,  as  expreiTed  in  article  XXXVII, 
is  maintained  by  the  Church  in  America,  in  as  full 
and  ample  manner  as  in  England".  What  I  would 
obferve  here  is,  the  difficulty,  I  may  rather  fay  the 
impoffibility  of  conceiving  how  it  fhould  be  be- 
lieved, that  "  NONE  but  Biffiops  have  a  right  to 
govern  the  Church",  while  it  is,  at  the  fame  time 
believed,  that  the  "  King  is  the  fupremiC  Governor 
of  it",  according  to  the  article  refer*d  to,  which 
declares,  that  he  hath  the  chief  Power,  the 
CHIEF  Government  in  all  Ecclefiaftical  caufes. 
The  King*s  fupremacy  in  the  Church  means  no- 
thing fhort  of  this,  that  he  is  "  vefted  with  all 
*'  power  to  exercife  all  manner  of  Ecclefiaftical 
*' jurifdidlion,  and  that  Arch-Bifhops,  Bifhops, 
*'  Arch-Deacons,  and  other  Ecclefiaftical  perfons, 
*'  have  no  manner  of  jurifdidion  Ecclefiaftical,  but 
*'  by  and  under  the  King's  Majefty,  who  hath  full 
*'  power  and  authority  to  hear  and  determine  all 
•'  manner  of  caufes  Ecclefiaftical,  and  to  reform 
*'  and  correcft  all  vice,  fin,  errors,  herefies,  enor- 
*'  mities,  abufes  whatfoever,  which  by  any  manner 
*^  of  fpintual  authority  or  jurifdidion  ought,  or 

!!  may 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anrwered.     sy 

*'  mav  be  lawfully  reformed".  *  Bifhops  there- 
fore, are  fo  far  from  being  "  the  only  Governors 
of  ihe  Church",  that  they  are  nothing  more  than 
fubordinate  rulers,  dependent  on  the  Kmg,  who, 
by  their  own  acknowledgemenr,is  placed  over  them 
as  their  supreme  head.  The  plain  truth  is,  as  to 
authority,  "purely  Ecclefiailical",  there  isnofuch 
thing  in  the  Church  of  England.  Whatever  au- 
thority it's  Clergy,  whether  fuperior  or  inferior,  are 
vefted  with,  it  is,  in  all  it's  branches,  both  granted 
and  regulated  by  the  (late,  and  abfolutely  under 
it's  controul  j  infomuch,  that,  be  their  fpiritual 
powers  as  you  pleafe,  they  have  no  right,  by  the 
conftitution  of  the  Church,  to  put  them  into  ex- 
ercife,  but  in  the  precife  way  that  has  been  pre- 
fcribed  to  them  ;  nor  can  they  do  it  in  any  one 
inftance.  No  Bifhop  in  England,  not  ail  the  Bi- 
Ihops  united  in  a  body,  with  all  that  plenitude  of 
power  that  has  been  derived  to  them  in  a  diretft 
line  from  the  Apoftles,  have  a  conftitutional  right 
to  make  the  leaft  alteration  in  the  eflablifhed  form 
of  worfnip,  ordination,  or  difcipline.  Tliey  are 
H  reftrained 

*  Diflent.  Gentleman's  anfwer  to  Mr.  White,  pag.  24.. 
in  which  he  refers  to  26th  Henry  VIII.  cap.  137. — 
Henry  Vril.  cap.  xvii.  i  Eliz.  cap.  i.  See  alfo  Burn, 
on  Ecclefiaftical  law,  un-Jer  the  word.  Supremacy  ; 
where  the  feveral  adts  of  Parliament,  relative  to  this 
fubje6t,  in  the  reigns  of  Henry  8th,  Edward  6th,  Eli- 
zabeth, and  William  and  Mary,  are  cited  ;  where 
likewife  It  will  be  found,  "  that  no  perfon  fhall  be  re- 
ceived into  the  miniftry,  nor  admitted  to  any  E'-clefia- 
ftical  funcftion,  except  he  (hall  firft  fubfcribe  (among 
others)  to  this  article  following  ;  "  that  the  King's 
Majefty  under  God  is  the  only  supreme  Governor. 
of  this  realm,  and  of  all  other  his  HighncfTes's  domi- 
nions and   countries,  as   well   in  all  spiritual  or 

,  Ecclesiastical  things,  as  temporal".— 


'58     The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwer^'d. 

reftrained  wirhin  certain  bounds,  beyond  which 
they  have  no  authority,  and  can  no  mere  exercife  ic 
than  any  common  Layman.  This  U  the  "  dc6t:- 
rine  and  belief  of  the  Church  of  England"  -,  and 
yer,  according  to  the  dodrihe  and  belief  of  this 
fame  Church,  as  the  Dr.  fays,  *'  none  have  a  right 
to  govern  it  but  Bifnops".  He  may,  perhaps,  find 
it  difficult,  upon  tryal,  to  make  borh  parts  of  this 
contradidion  true.  The  fhort  of  the  cafe  is,  Bi- 
fhops,  with  the  whole  Church-Clergy,  are  Crea- 
tures of  the  ftate,  and  the  Church  itfelf  a  Par- 
liamentary Church.  I  he  diffenting  genile- 
man,  in  his  anfwei  to  Mr  White,  has  fet  this  mat- 
ter in  a  ilrong  point  of  light.  Says  he,  *  ''  You 
^'  need  not  be  informed,  Sir^  that  all  the  Clergy 
"  of  this  Kingdom^  with  all  the  Billiops  at  their 
"  head,  have  not  the  leaft  authority  to  enjoin  one 
*'  ceremony  or  rite  of  worlliip  •,  or  to  either  eila- 
^'  blidi  or  annul  one  article  of  faiih.^  No,  but  all 
*'  power  ^nd  jurifdidion  is  lodged  chiefiy  in  Lay- 
*'  hands  ;  it  is  lolely  in  the  King  and  Parlia- 
*'  ME  NT,  and  the  Cler^^^y  are  to  a6l  in  all  things 
"  under  thrir  diredion  and  controul.  The  King 
*'  and  Parliament  are  in  truth  the  real  Fathers, 
*'  Governors,  or  Bifhops  of  this  Church  :  Thefe 
*'  only  have  power  to  make  br  unmake  forms  and 
*'  rites  of  wor{l:iip,  and  do  authoritatively 
*'  inPcrud  and  prefcribe  to  the  Clergy  v»'hat  they 
*'  are  to  believe — in  what  manntr,  and  to  whom 
*' the  facraments  are  to  be  given — what  prayers 
*'  they  are  to  offer  up — what  doctrine  to  preach — 
"  vy'ho  are  to  be  admitted  to  the  Epifcopate  or 
"  Prieftnood,  and  who  to  be  refufed — by  what 
*'  ceremonies,  prayers,  and  exhortations  they  are 
*'  to  be  fet  apart,  and  conlecrated  to  their  office. — 
^'  Thefc,  with  every  other  circumftance  relating  to 

t'  religion 
*  Pag.   9,   10. 


■fhe  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered.     §^ 

"  religion  and  the  woiihip  of  God,  which  is  au^ 
^'  THORiTATiVELY  prcfcribcd  or  enjoined  in  your 
"  Church,  you  know,  Sir,  not  ihe  Bid: ops  and 
^*  Clergy,' but  the  King  with  his  1-*arliament, 
*^  are  ihe  ONLY  perfons  who  have  authorita- 
"  TivELY  enjoined  and  preilrlbed  fhem.  The 
"  Clergy  of  the  whole  land,  in  convocaiiun  aflem- 
*'  bled,  cannot  fo  much  as  attempt  any  canons  or 
^*  conllitutions  without  the  King's  licencCy — yea, 
*'  fo  far  Sir,  were  the  Bilhops  and  Clergy  from 
*'  having  any  hand  in  the  firft  forming  our  prefenc 
*^  eitablifiied  Church,  or  in  ordering  it's  rites  and 
•f  articles  o^i^aith,  that  it  was  done  not  only  with- 
*'  OUT,  but  in  aduai  opposition  to  them.  Fcr 
^'  in  the  ift  of  Queen  Elifabeth,  the  Parliament 
'"  alone  eftabliihed  the  Queen's  fupremacy,  and 
"  the  Common-prayer-book,  in  fpite  of  all  oppofi- 
'*  tion  from  the  Biiliops  in  the  houfe  of  Lords  ; 
"  and  the  Convocation,  then  fitting,  were  fo  far. 
"  from  having  any  hand  in  thofc  Church-a6ts 
*'  for  reformation,  that  they  prefented  to  the  Par- 
"  liament  feveral  propofitions  in  behalf  of  the 
"  Tenets  of  Popery,  di redly  contrary  to  the  pro- 
^\  ceedings  pf  the  Parliament.  Hence,  Sir,  1  think 
"  you  mutt  be  abiolutely  forced  to  own  (what  I 
*'  know  gentlemen,  of  your  robe  do  not  care  to 
"  hear)  that  the  Church  of  England  is  really  a 
"  Parliamentary  Church  ;  that  it  is  not  pro- 
*'  perly  an  Ally,  but  a  mere  Creature  of  the 
*'  ilare.  It  depends  intirely  upon  iht  a6ls  and 
"  authority  of  Parliament  for  it's  very  tflence 
^'  and  frame'*. 

The  other  remark,  though  not  cfientially  im- 
portant, may  yet  be  worthy  of  notice,  it's  dtfign 
h  to  point  out  a  great  and  manUelt  difference  be-r 


6o     The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfvvered. 

twixt  the  complaint  as  made  at  the  head  of  this 
Srdion,  and  in  the  paragraph  fome  words  of  which 
we  have  been  confidenngjand  it's  vindication  after- 
■Viards,     The  ground  of  complaint,  as  there  ipcci- 
iied,  is  this,  the  Church  of  England  in  America, 
being  without  BiHiops,  muft,  for  that  reafon,  '*  be 
without  <2;overnment  and  ordination"  :  Whereas, 
the  juftification  of  this  complaint  does  not  proceed 
vpon  the  luppofiiion,  either  that  they   have  "  na 
government",  or  ca»  have  *'  no  ordinarion"  ;  buc 
that  their  government  without  Bifhops  is  incom- 
plete and  infufHcient,  and   that  ordination  cannct 
be  had   without  difficulty,  danger  and  expence. 
No  government,  and  that  which  is   incomplete; 
no  ordination,  and  ordination  with  inconvenience 
and  charge,  are  quite  different  things.     The  com- 
plaint therefore  fhould  not  have  been  made  in  ab- 
solute terms,  as  it's  illuflration  is  attempted  in  a 
regained  mitigated  fenfe  only.     There  would   not 
then  have  been   a  difagreement  betwixt  them,  as 
there  certainly  is  as  they  now  (land.     Let  it  be  re- 
membered, it  is  only  in  the  rcftrained  fenfe  of  this 
com.plainr  that  I  am  called  to  confider  it.     JHav- 
ing  obllrved  thefe  ihir;gs,  the  way  is  prepared  to 
go  on. 

The  Br.  begins  with  the  affair  of  "  Govern- 
ment", and  fays,  "  It  is  to  be  underftocd  in  a  qua- 
*'  lifitd  fenfe.  For  where  there  is  abfolutely  no 
*'  government  iat  all,  there  can  be  nothing  but 
^' diforder  and  confufion  -,  which,  I  iruft,  is  not 
*'  yet  the  cafe  of  the  Church  in  America".  The 
Church  then,  by  this  "qualii^ed  lenfe",  mitigating 
it's  didrefs,  is  not  in  that  "  wretched  condition", 
one  was  led  to  imagine  when  it  was  faid,  "  while 
V^ithoutBiiliops  it  muil:  te  widiowt  Government". 

It 


The  Appeal  tQ  the  Public  anfwercd.     6i 

It  follows  in  the  next  paragraph,  "  It  has  been 
''  allowed,  that  Prelbytcrs  may  have  a  fubordinate 
*'  authority  to  govern  ;  and  it  is  welf  known,  that 
"  the  Biihop  of  London  hath  formerly  taken  fome 
''  cognizance  of  Ecclefiaftical  matters  in  the  P!an- 
*'  tations,  by  virtue  of  the  King's  commifilon". 
If  Prcfbyters  may  a6t  '*  authoratatively"^  in  mat- 
ters of  government,  though  their  authority  fhould. 
be  **  fubordinate",  the  Church  is  in  a  ftill  lefs  de- 
plorable  ftate  than  was    reprefented  by  the  com- 
plaint, as  at  firfl:  worded  •,  efpecially,  if  the  Bifhop 
of  London  may  *'  take  cognizance  of  their  Eccle- 
fiaftical matters".     And  it  is  evident  he  may,  be- 
caufe  he  has.     That  which  has  been  may  be  again. 
Bjt  fays  the  Dr.  "  much  more  than  this  is  need- 
ful to   anfwer   the  neceflities   of  the  American 
Church.     The  Clergy  can  evidently  do  but  little 
without  a  Bifhop".  *     And  he  might  have  added, 

they 

*  The  Dr.  iii  a  marginal  note  here,  having  hinted  that 
there  had  been  voluntary  conventions  of  the  Clergy  in 
fome  of  the  Northern  Colonies  for  a  number  of  years, 
this  being  the  moft  they  could  do  to  relieve  the  Church 
in  the  prefent  ftate  of  things,  fays,  "  Indeed  fuch  con- 
ventions of  theClergy,wherein  all  the  members  meet  to- 
gether on  terms  ofequality,are  unknown  to  theChurch  of 
England".  And  they  are  equally  unknown  upon  terms 
of  inequality,  at  leaft  to  adt  authoritatively  as  a  body, 
in  order  to  change,  or  amend  any  one  order  of  the 
Church,  or  to  make  a  new  one.  It  would  rot  there- 
fore be  of  any  fervice  to  have  a  Biftiop  at  the  head  of 
the  American  conventions  of  the  Clergy.  If  nothing 
more  is  intended  by  thele  convent'ons  than  to  encou- 
rage and  help  one  another,  and  unite  their  counfels  for 
the  good  of  the  Church,  conformably  to  it's  laws  and 
canons,  there  is  no  need  of  a  Bifhop  at  their  head  :  If 
their  defiun  is  to  aft  as  a  body  in  an  authoritative  way, 
the  conftitution  of  the  Church  forbids  it.  As  to  what 
:  follows. 


62     The  Appeal  to  tlie  Public  anfwercd» 

they  can  do  but  little  with  him,  in  point  of  difu^ 
pline.  The  Church  at  home  is,  in  this  refped,  in 
as  lamentable  a  (tare  as  the  Church  in  America^ 
and  ir*s '^  neceffifies"  as  loudly  call  for  rtdrefs^ 
The  Liturgy  itfclfruppofcs  their  difipline  to  be 
in  a  v/retched  condition.  Why  elfe  is  the  Church 
taught,  once  a  year,  on  Afh-Wtdnefday,  **  to  wifh 
it's  godly  difcipline  reftortd"  ?  Bur,  notwithliand- 
ing  it's  pious  widies,  annually  repeated,  it  remains 
fli'li  in  a  deplorably  bad  ftate,  Epifccpalians  ihcm- 
fclyes  being  judges.  Says  the  learned  Dr.  Whit- 
by, *  "  The  Church  of  England  pbferves  no  dif- 
cipline". The  excellent  Bifliop  Burnet,  at  the 
clofe  of  his  hillory  of  the  reformation  notes,  -t* 
*'  There  was  one  thing  [ive  could  heartily  wifli 
*'  there  were  no  more]  yet  warning  to  compleat 
*'  the  reformation  of  this  Church,  which  was  the 
*'  reltormg  a  primitive  difcipline  againft  fcanda- 
*'  lous  perfons  ;  the  eflabl  filing  the  government 
*'  cf  the  Church  in  Ecciefiatlicai-handsj  and  taking- 

foHows,  ^'  that  for  fuch  a  number  cf  Prefbyters  to  be 
left  without  a  Bifnop  at  th  ;:  head  to  fuper-inter.d  and 
govern  them,  it  is  a  thing  cquai':y  unknown  to  any 
Episcopal  Church  on  earth'  ;  it  may  be  faid,  there  is 
fcarce  an  Epifcopal  protell'.nt  Chuic  »  on  the  earth 
befi.^es  the  Engiili  one  :  and  this  no  more  allows 
Prefb,  ttrs  with  ^  Bifliop  at  their  head,  than  by  them- 
felves  alone,  to  do  any  thing  autiioritativciy  as  a  body. 
It  is  well  known,  there  cannot  be  a  convpration  with- 
out the  King's  wr-t  ;  nor  can  they  when  met  do  any 
thing  without  the  King's. licence  ;  nor  will  any  doing 
of  theif's  be  of  binding  force  unlefs  the  King  corfirms 
it.  I  do  not  fuppofe  thcfe  conventions  ot  the  Clrrgy 
are  unfavorably  thought  of  at  HoiriC,  None  here 
objed  againft  them. 

•  Vid.  his   note  on   PvOm.  14.  6.  t  Dr.  Calamy'^ 

defence  of  Mod.  Non-conformity,  Part  il.  pag.  34.C. 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwcred.     ^3 

*Mt  out  of  Lay-hands,  which  have  fo  long  pro- 
"  phani^d  ir,  and  have  expofed  thj  authority  ofthe 
''  Church,  and  the  cenfures  of  it,  chiefly  excom- 
"  miinication,  to  the  contompc  of  the  nation  ;  by 
"  which  the  reverence  due  to  holy  things  is,  in  fo 
"  great  a  meafure,  loft,  and  the  dreadfu'.left  of  all 
*'  cenfures  is  now  become  the  mod  Icorned 
*'  and  defpifcd".  I  fnail  add  here  the  complainc 
of  a  noted  high  Church-writer  upon,  this  brad. 
"  Difcipline,  fays  he,  *  is  lort,  and  will  not  be  per- 
"  mitted  by  the  (late  ;  which,  by  virtue  of  conge 
"  d*  EJlire^s^  ^tare  impediis^  prohibitions^  &c.  have 
*'  made  themielves  the  fole  and  ultimate  judges, 
"  not  only  of  all  Bifhops  and  Churches  -,  but  of 
*'  their  excommunicarions,  and  every  exercife  of 
"  their  fpiritual  jurifdidion".  The  plain  truth  is, 
the  conftitution  of  the  Church,  at  leaft  in  the 
affair  of  difcipline,  is  in  a  miferably  defedive,  if 
not  ruined,  date.  It  i£reatly  wants  amendment  ; 
and  unlefs  it  fhould  vaftly  differ  in  America  fom 
what  it  is  in  England,  Bilhops  would  be  of  little 
fervice  with  refped  to  difcipline.  TheChurch  may, 
perhaps,  do  as  well  without  them,  as  with  them. 

The  Dr.  fays  farther,  "  Tryal  has  heretofore 
been  made  what  could  be  done  by  commiflarics". — 
And  why  might  not  commiiTaries  fupply  the  place 
of  Bifhops,  at  leaft  in  regard  of  difcipline  ?  Per- 
haps, it  will  be  found,  upon  examination,  that 
Bifhops  can  do  little  more  than  they  might  be  able 
to  do.  "  But  their  ufefulnefs  (as  it  follows)  upon 
the  whole  appeared  to  be  fo  inconfiderable,  that 
hone  have  been  appointed  for  near  twenty  years". 
PofTibly,  the  reafon  of  their  not  being  ufeful  was 
owingj'not  to  the  ufelefTncfs  of  the  office  itfelf,  but 

to 

f  Gafe  of  the  Regal,  and  Pontif.  pag.  i65. 


64    The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered. 

to  it's  not  being  filled  with  thofe  who  were  duly 
qualified  for  it.  This,  1  believe,  is  the  exadl  truth 
with  reference  to  the  lad  comniifTary  the  Church 
had  in  thefe  parts,  and  I  know  not  but  the  only 
one  it  ever  had.  He  was  a  native  of  England,  and 
fent  from  thence  an  utter  ftranger  to  the  people 
here.  The  Bifhop  of  London  could  not  thcTs  fore 
be  impofed  on  by  "  ample  credentials*',  relative  to 
his  chara6ler,  from  this  part  of  the  world,  /ind 
yet,  he  was  (o  far  from  being  fuperior  to  his  bre- 
.  thren,  that  fome  of  them,  I  know,  would  have  tho't 
it  a  difhonor  to  be  compared  with  him.  Some- 
thing of  his  juft  merit  may  be  learned  from  the 
affair  of  Hopkington,  as  publiflied  by  Dr.  Mayhew, 
in  one  of  his  pieces  on  the  difpute  about  the  con- 
du6t  of  the  Society  for  the  propagation  of  the 
Gofpel  in  foreign  parts.  If  no  more  care  is  taken 
as  to  the  perfonal  qjaliBcations  of  Bifhops,  fhould 
they  be  fent,  I  will  venture  to  prophefie,  that,  in 
lefs  than  twenty  years,  even  the  Epifcbpal  Clergy 
ihemfclves  will  be  heartily  fick  of  them. 

The  Dr.  pag,  30.  divides  the  government  of 
the  Church  into  "  two  branches",  taking  in  both 
"  the  Clergy,  and  the  Laity".  But,  before  he 
comes  to  apply  this  divifion  to  the  cafe  of  the 
American  Church,  he  interpofes  a  few  things 
which  mutt  not  pafs  unnoticed. 

Says  he,  pag.  ibid.  "  What  the  jull  penalties 
^^  "  of^obedience  are,  we  muil  learn,  from  the  nature 
*'  of  the  Church  itfelf — The  power  of  the  Church 
*'  is  of  a  fpiritual  nature;  and  the  utmofl  efted  of 
"  if,  in  this  world,  is  the  cutting  off  and  rejedling 
*'  thofe  members  which  are.  incurably  and  danger- 
*^  oufly  corrupted"*— —-This  is  certainly  true  of 

"  the 


The  Appeal  to  the  JPablic  anfwerec}.     6^ 

the  Church,  confidered,  in  ic's  proper  ftnfei  as  «'  a 
kingdom  that  is  not  of  this  world".  But  it  is  really 
aftonifliing,  that  he  fliould  make  fpiritiial  cenfures 
the  uemoll  cffed  of  the  power  of  the  Church  of 
England.  He  mud  be  very  ignorant,  if  he  did 
not  know,  that  an  "  excommunicated  member  is 
''  delivered  over  to  the  civil  arm  to  humble  and 
"  chaftlfe  him  ;  is  difabled  from  afiening  his  na- 
"'  tural  rights,  from  being  a  witnefs,  from  bring- 
"  ing  adions  at  law,  and,  if  he  does  not  fubmit  in 
*'  forty  days,  a  writ  fliall  iiTue  forth  to  imprifon 
"  him".  *  it  follows,  '*  Excommunication,  how^ 
ever  It  was  dreaded  in  the  purelt  ages  of  ChriQi- 
anity,  has  loft  much  of  it's  force  in  This  ;  wherein 
Altars  are  fet  up  againft  Altars,  and  Churches  a- 
gainft  Churches,  and  thofe  who  are  rejcfted  by  one, 
may  be  received  by  another".  I  cannot  affirm, 
that  the  Church  of  England  in  the  Colonies  have 
not  admitted  thofe  to  ^&  Gofpel-privileges  from 
among  us,  whofe  inoral  conduct  was  an  hindrance 
to  their  being  admitted  to  them  in  our  Churches  ; 
but  this  I  will  fay,  on  the  contrary,  that  no  one, 
in  like  circumflances,  was  ever  received  from  Epif- 
Gopal  Churches  into  any  of  our's  •,  and  1  dare  ven- 
ture to  engage,  that  this  will  never  happen,  unlefs 
we  fhould  become  corrupt  to  a  degree  far  beyond 
what  has  ever  yet  been  our  cz\t.  l^he  Dr.  goes 
on,  "  a  difpoficion  to  flight  the  higheft  punifliment 
'^  which  the  Church  can  inflidl  has  become  gene- 
"  ral,  and  there  appears  to  be  no  remedy  for  it, 
"  unlefs  in  the  ufe  of  rcafon  and  perfuafion*  But 
"  we  live  in  an  age,  in  which  the  voice  of  reafon 
*'  will  not  be  heard,  although  fupported  by  the  de- 
•'  clarations  of  heaven,  on  the  fubjedlof  Church- 
I  "  difcipline, 

*  Diflent.  Gent.  anfw.  to  Mr.  White,  pag.  2Z. 


6()    The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered. 

•'  difcipline.     Nay,  a  man  would  be   generally  e- 
*'  (teemed  to  be  eiiher  wrong-headed,  or   mean- 
*'  fpirited,  or  both^  who  (hould   profeis  much  re- 
"  verence  for  Ecclefiallical   authority  •,    and   the 
*'  charge  of  Prieft-craft^   fo  long    hackneyed    by 
*'  infiUels    and   libertmes,  would   be  fuie  to    fall 
"  upon  the  Clergy,  fliould  they  have  courage   to 
"  fpeak  up  for  it",    it  is  readily  acknowledged,  the 
difcipline  of  the  Church  is  held   in  contempt   by 
muliitudes.     Infidels  and  Libertines  laugh  to   fee 
how  it  is  exerciied,  v/hile  ferious  good  people    are 
pained  at   heart.     And   \i   would,  in   truth,  be  a; 
fhame  for  a   man  to  fpeak  in   it's   defence  :  But 
whofe  fault  is  this  ?  If  fo  facred  a  matter   as   the 
difcipline  of  Chriil  is  managed  by  the  Church  in  a 
contemptible  manner,  and  is  permitted   to  be  ^o^ 
year  after  yeary  without  any  attempt  for  redrefs, 
why  lliould   it  be  thought   ftrange,  if  Libertines 
treat  it  with  fneer  and  ridicule  ?  This  is  no  other 
than  might  reafonably  be  expeded.     Juft  occafion 
is  given  for  it>     You   knov/.  Sir,  to  ufe  here  the 
words  of  the  diiTenting  Gentleman,  *  that  "  feme 
"  of  the  molt  facred  acts  of  fpiritual  jurifdidlion, 
"  it's    folemn    cenjures   and    exccmfuunications    are 
^'  exercifed     rn     the   Church     of    England     by 
"  unconfecrated  and  meer  Laymen.     Thefe  hold 
*'  the  Keys^  open  or  fliut,  cad  out  or  admit  to  ir, 
*'  according  to  their  fole  pleafure.     The   Chancel- 
*'  lors^  Ojjiciah^  Surrogates,  who  adminifter  the  ju- 
*'  rifdidtion  of  fpiritual  Courts,  and  determine  the 
*'  mod  important  fpiritual  matters,  fuch  as  deliver- 
"  ing  men  to  the  devil,  &c.  frequently  are,  and,  by 
''  exprefs  provifion  of  law,  always  may  be  Laymen. 
*'  And  truly,  Sir,  1  greatly  pity  you  Gentlemen  of 
^'  theClergy,  that  fome  of  the  moft  tremendous  and 

"  folemn 

*  Vid.  pag.  21,  1%. 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered,     67 

9  folemn  parts  of  your  facred  office,  fuch  as  Ex- 
*'  co'mmunicationSy  /ihfoluticns^^Q.  you  2^xt  forced  to 
"  perform,  not  only  according  to,  but  fometimes, 
*' perhaps,  dire611y  againft  your  own  judgments, 
"  as  you  are  authoritatively  direded  and  command- 
^^  ed  by  thefe  Lay-perfon?.  Forced,  1  lay,  to  do 
'*'  it,  notwithdanding  what  you  urge  about  your 
"  own  Concurrence  ;  for  if  you  refufe  to  concur, 
"  you  are  immediately  liable  to  fufpenfiGn  ah  cjjicio 
,''  et  heneficio  ;  and  if  you  continue  obftinate,  to  be 
"  excommunicated  your  own  felves".  You  know 
alfo,  that  in  the  Church  of  England  fpiritual  cen- 
fures  may  be  bought  off  with  money,  or  exchang- 
ed for  it.  "  May  not,  fays  the  dillenting  Gentle- 
''  man,*  a  grievous  finner,  according  to  herconfti- 
*'  tution,  be  fuftcred  to  commute  ?  To  have  par- 
^'  don  for  money,  and  to  flcreen  himfelf  by  a  round 
"  fee  from  ihe  ftroke  of  the  Church's  rod  ?  Yea, 
"  when  he  is  going  to  be  delivered,  or  adlualiy  is 
';  delivered,  into  the  hands  of  the  devil,  and  latan 
"  has  him  in  keeping,  will  not  an  handjcme  Ju;n 
''  prefcntly  pluck  him  thence,  and  redore  him^  to 
"■'  the  Church's  foft  and  indulgent  bolom  again"  ? 
What  a  mockery  of  religion  is  this!  How  pro- 
p'une  ^n  a,bule  of  the  diicipline  Chnil  hcis  intt;- 
tu-ed  !  "  Thy  money  perilli  with  thee",  faid  th-; 
apoftle  Peter,  upon  a  like  occafian.  This  moil 
fcandalous  pra(Stice  can  be  judified,  neither  by  the 
fcripture,  nor  primitive  antiquity.  There  is  not  a 
word  to  be  found  in  either  of  tliis  prophane  comniu- 
tation. — You  cannot  bur  know  farther, what  is  ft;!!, 
if  pofnble,  more  {liameful,  that  tjie  vileH:  fmners  are 
fuft^icd,  in  your  Church,  to  partake  of  the  fym- 
b  jIs  of  Chrift's  body    and   blood.     Sjys  one  of  the 

I  2  h^^ 

^  Pag.  21. 


^8     The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfvvered. 

bed  and   ftmnged  writers    againft  the  Church,  * 
■'  are  not  fomc  of  the  moft  prophane  and  aban-. 
*'  donedof  men,  Rakes,  Debauchees,  Blafphemers 
'^'  of  God^  and  Scoffers  ai   all  religion,  oiten   ktn 
*'  upon  their  kncts   around   ycur  coinmunion-tahle^ 
*'  eating  the  chlkhen'^s^bread;  and  partaking  of  the 
^'  holy  elements  to  qualiBe  for  a  Fojl  ?  Dare  your 
"  minifters  rei'i:fe  them  !   No,  they  dare  not  refufe 
*'  the  tnolt  impious  UajpLeiner  the   three   kingdoms 
*'  afford,  when  he  comes  to  demand  it  as  a  quali- 
^'  fication  foran  citice  in  the  Army  or  Fleet.     And 
^'  if,  in  any  other  cafe,  the  Pried  denies  the  facra- 
*'  ment  to  the  mod  infamcus  Gnner  dwelling  in  his 
■'  Pariili,  if  the  man,  upon  an  appeal  to  the  Eccle- 
*'  fiailical  court,  can  fecure  the   favor  of  the  Lay^ 
"  Chancellery  he  m,ay  fecurely  ^^iti-"^  both  the  mini- 
•'  (ler  and  the  Bilhop  to  keep  him  fromi  the  Lord's 
*'  table.    TlitChanccllor's  determination  (hall  Hand 
*'  in    h:w,  though  contrary  to  the  Bishop's  ; 
"  and  the  miniircr  be  liable  to  a  rufpen-fion  for  le- 
-Vfufmg  compliance  ;  and  if  he  is  contumacious, 
"•  and  will  nor  give  the   man  the   facrament,  even 
'-'•■  to  exco,mmi!n;caiion  itfelP'.      As  this  is  the  real 
flace  of  the  Cliqrch  of  JEnghnd's  difcipline,  it   is 
no    wonder  "  a  m^^n    vvould    be  efteemed   wrong- 
headed,  if  l^c   fhould    proftfs  much'  reverence  for 
it",     infcead  of  revering  "  Ecclt- fiailical  auiiiority", 
51S  exerciied    in    the  eitabliditd  Church,   it  oughc 
rather  to  be  lamented  ovtr  as  giving'  but  too  jufc 
occafun  for  jt's  being  High  ted  ^nd  condeirined. 

The  Dr.  now  comes *to  the  point  in  hand,  the 
dilcipline  of  the  Church  under  anAmerican  Epifco- 
pate.  And  he  enters  upon  it  with  a  frank,  honeft 
acknovvledgment,  though  it  ptaliy  fubverts  all  thac 

he 

*  DliTent.  Gent  pag.  65. 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anrwered,     69 

he  has  afterwards  faid.  Fj^  words  are,  *  "  In  this 
(tare  of  things,  the  reftoration  of  ihe  primitive  dif- 
cipline  fecms  to  be  a  matter  rather  to  be  wiChed  for 
anddefired,  than  to  be  rationally  attempted 
by  thofe  in  authority".  And  yet,  ic  is  propofed, 
that  this  very  thing,  which  c?.nnot  rationally 
BE  attempted",  Ihould  not  only  be  attempted, 
b'Jt  carried  into  effecl.  It  is  faid  indeed,  ''  no  at- 
tempt of  ihis  nature  will  be  made  refpecling  the 
Laitf,  under  an  American  Epifcopate.  Thcdif- 
cipiine  of  the  Church,  fo  far  as  it  relates  to  the 
private  Members,  will  be  left  as  it  is". — Buc 
then,  it  is  added,  ''  with  regard  to  the  Clergy,  ic 
is  prop6fcd,  that  a  ftrid  difcipline  be  etlablillied, 
and  that  the  BiHiop's  power  over  them  iliall  he  as 
full  and  complete,  as  the  laws  and  canons  of  the 
Church  direct".  But  why  fliould  the  difcipline, 
diredled  to  by  the  laws  of  the  Church,  be  confined 
to  the  Clergy,  while  the  Laity  are  left  without  re- 
ftraint  ?  Judge  ye  that  conllituie  the  Public,  whe- 
ther this  is  rcafonable  ?  Whether  it  confifls,  in  any 
tolerable  meafure,  with  tlie  Goipel-inftitution  of 
difcipline  ^  Is  not  godly  difcipline  as  ntedful  for 
the  Laity  as  the  Clergy  ?  Are  the  Church-Clergy 
fo  much  worfe  than  iheLaity,  chat  the  latter  may  be 
left  to  themfelves,  while  *'  ailrid  difcipline  fhall  be 
etlabliriied  for  the  former  ^  What  would  the  Dr. 
have  the  world  think  of  the  Epifcopal-Clergy,  by 
placing  them  in  i'o  unfavorable  a  light  ?  Briides, 
are  not  Bidiops,  as  fuccefiors  to  the  Apoftles,  as 
much  veiled  with  authority  to  govern  the  Laity  as 
the  Clergy  ^  And  wirvr  Ihould  their  apoftolic  au- 
thority, be  thus  limited  by  a  meerly  human  efta- 
bliiliment  .?  Efpecially,  as  the  Dr.  himfelf  f  makes 
it  one   main  article  of  his   complaint,  that  "  the 

people, 

•  J  Pag.  3f»  t  Pag'  29* 


yo     The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered. 

PEOPLE,  bting  fenfible  of  the  Clergy's  want  of 
power,  without  anEcclefialiical  fuperior,  find  them- 
felvcs  free  from  all  refiraints  ot  Ecclffiadical  au- 
thority" ;  intimating  the  expediency  of  their  being 
*'  governed  by  thofe  who  have  proper  authority^ 
and  that,  without  this,  the  body  is  without  firen^th, 
and  liable  lo  be  deitroyed".-  Ii  is  really  furprifing, 
when  Biiliops  are  pleaded  for  as  necessary  in 
order  todifcipline,  that  they  (hould  not  be  fi  ffered 
to  exercife  ir,  in  fo  important  a  branch  as  that  of 
the  governmf  nt  of  the  Laity  !  One  would  not  have 
expected  fuch  a  propofal  trom  Epilcopal  Clergy- 
men. 

Perhaps,  it  will  be  faid,  the  lamentable  Rs-te 
of  the  Church's  difcipline  reipeits  the  Laity  only. 
It  would  therefore  be  in  vain  to  attcm.pt  it's  redc- 
ration  in  regard  of  them  \  though  it  may  reafona- 
bly  be  atttm^pted  with  refped  to  the  Clergy.  Bu.t 
this  is  a,meer  pireience.  if  there  is  any  force  in 
the  argument  taken ftom  the  wretched  condition  of 
the  Church's  difcipline,  it  is  equally  llrong  againft 
it's  beino;  eftablifhed  for  the  soverrmient  of  either. 
For  It  is  equally  lame,  lax,  and  inefiedual  rcfped- 
ing  both.  It's  ruined  fcatc,  in  regard  of  the  Laity, 
has  been  already  pointed  out.  1  v/ould  now  fay, 
notwiihdanding  all  the  godly  diicipline  of  ihcEng-; 
liih  Church,  many  ignorant,  loofe,  vicious  men, 
are  veiled  with  the  PrieR's  ofiice,  and  peimitted  to 
a6t  in  it.  The  Public  is  called  upon  lo  attend  to 
a  few  v^ords,  fromi  the  excellciU  Bifliop  Burner,  re- 
lative to  the  Church-Clergy,  'i  hey  are  intro- 
duced in  this  folemn  manner,  '^  "  I  am  nov/  in  the 
'*  70th  year  of  my  age,  3.nd  as  I  cannot  fpeak  long 
"  to  the  world  in  any  Ibrtj  fo  1  cannot  hope  for  z 

"  more 

♦  Preface  to  his  Pafloral  Care,  psg.  24. 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfUrered.     yi 

"  morerolemn  occafion  than  this  of  fpeaking  with 
"  all  due  freedom,  both  to  the  prefent  and  flic- 
"  ceeding  ages  ;  Therefore  I  lay  hold  on  it  to  give 
*'  a  free  vent  to  thofe  fad  thoughts  that  lie  on  my 
"  mind  both  day  and  night,  and  are  the  fubjed  of 
''  many  fccret  mournings.  I  dare  appeal  to  thac 
'*  God,  to  whom  the  fecrets  of  my  heart  are  known, 
"  to  whom  I  am  fhortly  to  give  an*account  of  my 
**  miniftry,  that  I  have  the  true  interclts  of  this 
"  Church  before  my  eyes,  and  that  I  purfue  them 
'*  with  a  fincere  and  fervent  zeal". — The  words 
themfelves  I  would  bring  to  view  are  as  follow,  ^ 
"  Our  Ember  weeks  are  the  burden  and  grief  of  my 
"  life.  The  much  greater  part  of  thofe  who  come 
"  to  be  ordained  are  ignorant  to  a  degree  not  to  be 
*'  apprehended  by  thofe,  who  are  not  obliged  to 
"  icnow  it.  The  eafieft  piart  of  knowledge  is  thac 
"  to  which  they  are  the  greateil  (Irangers  ;  I  meaa 
"  the  plained  parts  of  the  fcriptures,  which  they 
"  fay,  in  excufe  of  their  ignorance,  that  their  tutors 
*'  in  the  Univerfities  never  mention  the  reading  of 
•'  to  them  ;  fo  that  they  can  give  no  account,  or 
*'  at  leaiL  a  very  imperfedl  one,  of  the  contents  e* 
"  ven  of  the  Gofpels.  Thofe  who  have  read  fome 
''  fev/  books,  yet  feem  never  to  have  read  the  fcrip- 
"  tures.  Many  cannot  give  a  tolerable  account 
*'  even  of  the  Catechifm  itfelf,  how  fhort  and  plain 
"  foever^  They  cry,  and  think  it  a  fad  difgrace  to 
'*  be  denied  orders,  though  the  ignorance  of  fome 
^'  is  fuch,  that,  in  a  well  regulated  date  of  things, 
*'  they  would  appear  not  knowing  enough  to  be 
"  admitted  to  the  holy  facramertt.  This  does  often 
''  tear  my  heart.  1  he  cafe  is  not  much  better  in 
"  many,  who,  having  got  into  orders,  come  for 
^'  infbi.tution,  and  cannot  make  it  appear,  that  they 

^''  have 

^  Pag.  25,  26. 


72     The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfvvered. 

''  have  read  the  fcriptures,  or  any  one  good  book, 
"  fmce  they  were  ordained  ;  fo  that  the  imall  mea- 
•'  lure  of  knowledge  upon  which  they  get  into  holy 
"  orders,  net  being  iinproved,  is  in  a  way  to  be 
"  quite  lod  -,  and  then  they  think  it  a  great  hard- 
"  (hip  if  they  are  told,  they  mufl  know  the  fcrip- 
"  tures,  and  the  body  of  d!vinlty  better,  before 
"  they  can  be  trufted  with  the  care  of  fouls.  Thefe 
*'  things  pierce  one's  foul,  and  make  him  of: en  cry 
*'  our,  Ob  that  I  held  wifigs  like  a  dove,  for  then 
*'  would  1  fly  c'lvay^  and  be  at  reft  I  Vv^hat  are  we 
*'  like  to  grow  to  ?  In  what  a  cafe  are  wc  to  deal 
*'  with  any  adverfary,  Atheid, Papiti,  or  Diffenters, 
•'  or  in  any  fort  to  promote  ihe  hdne;r  of  God,  and 
*'  carry  on  the  great  concerns  of  the  Gofpel,  when 
*"'  {o  grofs  an  ignorance  in  the  fundamentals  of  re- 
*'  ligion  has  fpread  itfelf  fo  much  among  thofewha 
*'  ought  to  teach  others,  and  yet  need  that  one 
*'  teach  them  the  firfi  principles  of  ihe  cracles  of  God", 
This  fame  pious  and  learned  Bifliop  has  alio  given 
us  the  fentiments  of  Arch-Bifnop  Leightcn  upon 
this  head  in  the  following  words,  ''  He  looked  on 
the  (late  the  Church  of  England  was  in  with  very 
nulancholy  refiedions,  and  was  very  uneafie  at  an 
exprtlTion  then  much  ufed,  that  it  was  the  befl 
conftituted  Church  in  the  world.  He  thought  ic 
was  fo  with  relation,  to  the  dodrine,  the  worfliip, 
and  .the  main  part  of  our  government.  But,  as  to 
the  adminiftration,  both  with  relation  to  the  Eccle- 
fiailical  Courts,  and  the  Paftoral  care,  he  looked 
on  it  as  one  cf  the  moil  corrupt  he  h:id  ever  {^tn. 
He  thought  we  looked  like  a  fair  carcafe  of  a  body, 
without  a  fpirit,  without  that  zeal,  that  flridneTs 
of  life,  and  that  laborioufnefs  in  the  Clergy  that 
became  us.  *     To  the  like  purpofe   the  excellent 

Mr. 

♦  Hiftory  of  his  own  Time,  pag.  4^2,  Vol.  II. 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anAvered.     73 

Mr.  Pierce  complains  upon  this  head.  "  The 
''  Pariihoners,  fays  he,  *  in  a  ve-y  few  places  have 
*' that  power,  which,  Cyprian  fays,  belongs 
"chiefly  to  the  people,  of  chusing  worthy 
*'  Priests,  or  refusing  those  that  are  un- 
"  woRT^HY.  If  a  Redlor  is  to  be  placed  in  a 
"  Pariili,  the  Patron  of  the  living  writes  a  letter  to 
•*  the  Bifhop,  and  recommends  whatClcrgyman  he 
"  pleafes  to  be  put  into  it.  The  Bifliop  cannot  re- 
'^^  fufe  the  perfon  thus  recdrn  to  ended  \  and  fo  the 
^'  Pariilioriers,  whether  they  wil!  or  no,  are  com- 
"  mitted  t;)  the  care  of  that  Prtfbyter,  chofen  by  a 
'^'  ftranger,  and,  it  may  be,  a  notorioufly  wicked 
^'  perfon.  It  might,  perhaps,  ftem  incredible  a- 
"  broad,  if  I  (liould  alTerr,  that,  in  the  Church  of 
"England,  the  bed  reformed  Church,  as  they 
"  therhlelves  boaft,  in  the  v/orld, —  the  right  of 
"  Patronage  is  bought  and  fold  -,  and  that  ir  is  noc 
*'  reckoned  fimony,  nor  any  crime  at  all,  for  a  per- 
"  fon  to  buy  that  right,  or  the  hext  prefentation 
"  of  a  living,  provided  it  be  not  void  at  the  time. 
*'  Hence  ignorant  fellows, if  they  are  but  rich,  often 
"-  gee  the  fatted  benefices.  And  when  they  have 
*'  got  the  livings, they  are  not  bound  to  take  care  of 
'1M  the  flock  therrifelves  -,  it  is  enough  if  they  leave 
^'  fo  troublefdme  a  work  to  any  forry  Curate,  who 
*'  will  do  it  cheapeft.  Nay,  foinetimes  the  mini- 
*'  Iter  fhall  have  the  income  of  two,  three,  or  more 
parifhes,  who  will  not  vouchlafe  to  take  the 
paftoral  care  of  one'*.  He  adds  from  Bifliop 
Burnet,  "  what  can  v/e  fay,  when  we  find  often  the 
*'  pooreft  clerks  in  the  richeft  livings  ?  Whofe  in- 
*'  cumbents,  not  content  to  devour  the  parfimony 
*'  of  the  Church,  while  \.\\^y  feed  ibem/ekes,  and  not 
J'  the  flock  out  of  it,  are  fo  fcandaloufly  hard  in  their 
K  *i\  allowancd 

J  Vind.  of  DilTent.  pag.  562» 


6C 


'74    The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered. 

*'  allowance  to  their  Curates,  as  if  they  intend- 
*'  ed  eq-jally  to  ftarve  borh  curate  and  peo- 
"  pie".  Mr.  Pierce  oblerves  yet  farther,  *'  they 
*'  \\ho  have  procured  themfelves  bentfices  may,  in 
**  a  manner,  live  as  they  pleafe.  Several  of  our 
*'  prefent  Bifhops,  of  eminent  learning  and  piety, 
**  v.'ho  would  be  glad  to  proceed  againft  vicious 
"  Clergy-men,  and  turn  them  out  of  their  livings, 
*'  find  themfelves  hindered  by  our  laws  from  doing 
*'  it.  Hence  our  nation  abounds  with  diilblute 
'*  Clergy-men,  the  fhame  of  their  Country,  and 
**  the  holy  fun£lion".  I  may  fubjoin  to  what  has 
been  offered  from  the  above  writers,  that  a  very 
great  part  of  the  EpifcopaUClergy  are  onlyCurates, 
meer  Underlings,  hired  to  do  the  workywhich,  in 
all  reafon  and  confcience,  ought  to  be  done  by  o- 
thers ;  and  at  fo  low  a  rate  too,  that,  notwithftand- 
ing  the  riches  of  the  Church,  they  are,  many  of 
chem,  by  reafon  of  their  poverty,  made  "contemp- 
tible and  bale  before  all  the  people". 

Thus  miferably  lax  is  the  Church's  difciplinc 
refpeding  the  Clergy  ;  and  it's  nnethod  of  admi- 
nillraiion  is  fuch,  thar,  while  this  continues,  it  will 
be  as  vain  a  thing  to  attempt  a  reform  in  regard 
of  the  Clergy,  as  the  Laity.  The  government  of 
the  former  is  in  as  ill  a  Hare,  as  the  government 
of  the  latter  ;  and  this,  notwiihltanding  they  have 
fo  many  Biiliops  at  their  head,  fuper-intending  and 
direding  their  condu6t  :  And  no  wonder,  as  the 
aflair  of  difcipline  is  in  the  hnnds  of  Chancellors, 
rather  thanBifhops.  Says  theBirtiop  ot  Hereford,  * 
*'  If  there  be  any  thing  in  the' office  of  a  Bifhop  to 
*'  be  challenged  peculiar  to  themfelves,  certainly 
"  it  fhouid  be  this,  (excommunication)  yet  this  is 

"  in 
5  Naked  Truth,  pag.  58. 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered.     75 

*«  in  a  manner  quite  relinquifhed  to  their  Chancel- 
"  lors,  Laytnen,  who  have  no  more  capacity  to 
"  lentence  or  abfolve  a  finner,  than  to  diflblve  the 
"  heavens  or  the  earth — The  Chancellor  takes 
*'  upon  him  to  fentcnce  not  only  Laymen,  but 
*'  Clergymen- alfo  brought  into  his  court  for  any 
*'  delinquency.  And  in  the  court  of  Arches,  they 
"  fen tence  even  Biiliops  themfclves'*.— He  adds, 
*'  I  remember  when  he  Bilhop  of  Wells,  hearing 
*'  of  a  caufe  corruptly  managed,  and  commg  into 
"  court  to  redilie  it,  the  Chancellor  Dr.  Duck, 
*'  fairly  and  mannerly  bid  him  be  gone,  for  he 
*'  had  no  power  to  a^  any  thing  ;  and  there- 
"  wit  hall  pulled  out  his  Patent,  fealed  by  this 
"  Bilhop's  Fredeceflbr,  which  frightened  the  poor 

"  Bilhop  out  of  the  court". The  cRablifhment 

of  difciplme  here  mud  therefore  be  differenl  from 
what  it  i>  at  home,  or  it  will  be  as  truly  incomplete 
with  a  BiHiop  at  the  head  of  the  Clergy,  as  it  is  at 
prefent  without  one  ;  and  as  infuflicient  for  their 
government,  as  the  government  of  the  Laity. 

The  Dr.  goes  on  to  reprefent  the  neceflity  of  efla- 
blifliing  a  ftrid  difcipline  in  regard  of  the  Clergy. 
B'Jt  what  he  has  offered  is  far  lei's  weighty  than  one 
would  have  expected  in  an  affair  he  feems  to  lay 
fo  great  itrefs  upon.  He  confiders  the  Church- 
Clergy  as  either  virtuous  or  vicious,  and,  in  either 
cafe,  fays,  "  the  want  of  Bifhops  to  fuper-intend 
and  govern  them,  is  obvious  at  firft  view". 

Says  he,  in  cafe  of  their  being  virtuous,  "if 
"  they  have  no  need  of  a  Bifnop  to  keep  ihem  to 
"  their  duty,  yet  fome  cafes  will  at-ile,  in  which  his 
"  diredion  will  be  u  eful — and  many  cafes,  whtre- 
"  in  his  fupporc  and  encouragement  will  be  need- 
-  ^^  K  2  V  fuH 


^6     The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwcred. 

^'  ful — an-l  in  a'.l  cafes,  hisfriendfhip  and  patronage 
•*  w  11  give  lite  and  fpirit  to  them  in  undergoing 
^'  the  difficulties,  and  in  performing  the  duties,  of 
f'  their  fundion".  Bur  what  is  all  this  to  the  af- 
fair of  DISCIPLINE,  the  grand  point  in  view  ?  The 
pr's  bufinefs  here  was,  to  fhew  it  to  be  necessaPvY 
|hat  STRICT  DISCIPLINE  fliould  bc  eftablifhed 
with  refped  to  the  Clergy  ;  and  he  begins  his  ar- 
gument wiih  a  cafe,  wherein  it  is  not  needed. 
AT  ALL.  Is  this  pertinent  to  the  propofed  fubjedb 
of  debate  ?  Might  he  not  as  well  have  left  out 
ivhat  he  has  here  faid,  as  being  little  to  the  pur- 
pofe  ?  Befides,  the  advantange  here  reprefcnted  by 
the  iniiTion  of  a  B'.fiiop  is  rather  imaginary,  than 
leal.  Was  there  now  a  Billiop  in  whatever  part 
cf  Ameiica  he  would  chufe,  the  Clergy  would  not- 
wichflanding  be  yarioufly  didant  from  him  fome 
hundreds  of  miles  ;  infomuch  that  but  few  of  them 
could  reap  much  benefit  ei:her  by  his  direftion, 
cncou  agement,  or  patronage  ;  very  little  more, 
and  with  very  little  lefs  dilBcuity,  than  if  he  wa3, 
in  England, 

As  to  the  Clergy  of  a  vicious  chara£ler,  the  Dr. 
goes  on  to  fay,  "it  is  more  immediately  necefTary, 
on  account  of  thefe,  that  EpHcopal  Government 
fliould  rake  place  in  Aq-^erica"  And  why  ?  The 
JpUowing  coiifiderations  are  mentioned. 

'^  The  procefs  of  carrying  on  an  accufation,  and 
afterwards  of  fupporting  it,  at  fo  great-  a  diflance, 
ITluft  be  tedious  and  dillicult,  and,  in  fome  cafes, 
rnay  caufe  thofe  to  efcape  punifhment  who  really 
(delerve  it".  |s  pot  this  ajuil  leprefentation  of  a 
proc  fs  at  home,  though  there  are  Bifnops  theie^ 
gnd  the  c;ife  may  bp  parried  0|i  without  a  plea  for 

del^y 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered.     77 

delay  on  account  of  this  "  great  diftance'*  ?  Have 
not  multitudes  "  efcaped  punifhmcni"  by  this 
means,  who  richly  deferved  it  ?  And  is  not  this  the 
very  reafon  that  Epifcopalians  themfclves,  as  well  as 
piflenters,  have  often  given,  why  there  fhould  be 
a  reform  of  the  adminittratlon  of  difcipline  in  the 
Englilh  Church  ?  Have  they  not  long  complained 
of  the  difhculty,  tedioufnefs  and  expencc,  occafion- 
ed  by  the  spiritual  courts,  and  their  manage- 
ment by  Liy-cha  icellurs  ?  And  this  would  be  the 
complaint  here,  notwithftanding  the  prefence  of  a 
^IQiop.  The  Dr.  indeed  fays,  "  the  cafe  would 
be  ditfcrent  under  an  Epilcopate  •,  as  then  for  any 
grievance  of  this  nature,  the  Church  would  have 
an  eafie  and  effedual  remedy".  Has  not  the 
Church  rhis  ^'  eafie  and  efTev5lual  remedy"  at  home, 
under  the  government  of  Bifhops  ?  And  yet,  this 
grievance  continues,  and  there  is  no  profpedl,  ac 
prefent,  of  it's  being  removed.  And  the  cafe 
would  probably  be  much  the  fame  here,  unlefs  the 
eftablilhcd  mode  of  difcipline  fliould  be  fo  changed, 
as  to  be  quite  different  from  what  it  is  in  England. 
But,  if  an  alteration  is  to  be  made,  it  is  infinitely 
reafonable,  it  fhould  firft  take  place  at  home,  where 
it  is  moil  needed.  When  it  is  effedted  there,  ic 
will  be  time  enough  to  defire  it  here. 

Another  confideration  the  Dr.  men-ions  Is,  "  if 
a  Clergyman  fliall  difgrace  his  profefTion  in  an 
open  and  fcandalous  manner,  a  Bifhop  refiding  in 
the  Country  might  lufpend  him  immediately". 
Why  don't  the  Bilhops  do  it  at  home,  as  fcandalous 
Clergymen  are'  not  uncommon  there  ?  Befidcs, 
CommifTaries  might  be  veiled  with  ,the  power  of 
fufpenfion  ♦,  and  it  is  pofFible  thofe  might  be  found, 
who  would  exercife  this  power  with  as  much  wif- 
domj  impartiality  and  faithfulnefs,  as  Bilh^p^. 

It 


yS     The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfvvered. 

It  is  added,  "  and  if,  upon  tryal,  the  cafe  (hould 
be  found  to  delerve  it,  he  can  proceed  to  deprive 
him  o(  his  benefice,  and  not  only  filence  and  deprive 
him,  but  excommunicate  him  from  the  fcciety  of 
Chrillians".  Obferve,  the  cafe  muft  be  tried  be- 
fore the  fufpended  Clergy-man  can  be  deprived, 
fiienced  and  excommunicated.  But  where  is  this 
cafe  to  be  tried  ?  Can  it  be  tried  any  where,  con- 
formably to  the  mods  of  the  eftablifhed  Church, 
but  in  a  spiritual  court  ?  To  this  court  it  be- 
longs to  hear  the  cafe,  and,  if  it  appears  proper,  to 
order  the  Sentence  of  deprivation,  or  excommuni- 
cation. It  can  be  done  by  this  court  only  ;  and, 
Ihouid  the  fulpendedClergy  man  be  able  to  procure 
ihe  Chancelicr's  judgment  in  his  favor,  he  need 
not  fear  the  whole  power  of  the  Bifhop,  fliould  it 
be  exerted  againll  him.  Now,  this  fpiritual  court 
muft  be  eredted  here,  or  the  cafe  muit  be  carried 
home  to  feme  court  there.  If  it  is  to  be  carried 
and  fup[  orted  at  home,  the  com.plaint  of  ''  redi- 
oufhefs  and  difficuly"  vv'ili  remain  in  full  force. 
If  a  court  is  ertdled  here,  it  muft  be  quite  changed 
from  what  I?  is  in  England,  or  there  wiii  be  Itill 
tedious  difficuly,  and  great  expence  ;  infomuch 
that,  1  doubt  not,  E^/jfcopalians  themfelves  would 
foon  be  as  earneil  in  their  dcfires  to  be  delivered 
from  it,  as  they  now  arc  to  have  Bifhops. 

It  is  obferved  ftill  farther,  *'  the  Clergy'?  being 
under  the  eye  of  their  Biihop  will  naturally  tend 
to  make  them,  in  general,  more  regular  and  dili- 
gent in  the  difcharge  of  the  duties  ot  their  office'*. 
If  their  being  under  the  eye  of  the  omniprefenr, 
omnilcient  God,  will  not  make  them  regular  and 
diligent,  it  is  a  vain  thing  to  expe  r  that  their  be- 
ing under  "  the  eye  of  their  Bifhop"  fhould  do  it. 

k 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anlwered.     79 

It  certainly  has  not  this  effetl:  at  home  ;  and  it  is 
not  probable  this  would  be  the  effedl  here.  Be- 
fides,-  it  mtill  be  by  rhc  help  of  a  very  (1.  ong  figure 
that  they  can  be  iM  to  be  under  "  their  Bilhop's 
eye,  fo  as  to  be  much  influenced  by  this  confide- 
ration,  when,  by  far  the  greater  parr  of  them,  are 
fixed  in  cures,  Ibme  fifty,  fume  an  hundred,  and 
fome  two  or  three  hundred  miles  from  him  ;  as 
they  mud  continue  to  be  in  Amenci,  unlefs  ^he 
Church  here  has  many  more  Bifhops  than  ha/c 
ever  yet  been  talked  of. 

In  fine,  it  is  faid,  "  of  ihofe  whorechara6ler<;  are 
juftly  exceptionable,  fome  may  probably  be  re- 
formed by  a  Biihop  •,  and,  as  to  others,  they  may 
be  ealily  ciifplaced,  unlefs  it  be  the  fault  of  the 
people  themfeives"  The  reformation  of  vicious 
Clergy-men  is  not  (o  eafily  effedled.  I'he  BiQiops 
at  home  find  this  to  be  a  lad  truth.  And  no  good 
reafon  can  be  given,  why  it  fhould  be  otherwife 
here,  though  the  Clergy  had  one  or  more  Bifhops 
at  their  head  to  govern  them.  As  to  the  "  dif- 
placing"  unreformed  Clergy-men,  it  has  long  been 
complamed  of  in  England,  as  one  of  the  greateft 
difficulties  j  and  the  difficulty  would  be  much  the 
fame  in  America,  under  the  fame  mode  of  admi- 
niftring  Church-difcipline  ;  and  there  can  be  no 
other,  unlels  the  eftablifhedconftitution  is  departed 
from.  And  if  if  may  in  one  inftance,  it  may  in 
another  -,  and  (6  on  until  it  has  quite  loft  it's  pre- 
fent  form. 

I  HAVE  now  taken  notice  of  every  thing  the  Dr. 
has  faid,  in  favor  of  an  American- Epifcopate,  up- 
on the  head  of  di/cipliney^nd  cannot  but  think,  it  will 
appear,  that  he  has  very  much  failed  in  v/hat  he 

undertook 


8o     The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered. 

undertook  to  prove.  The  fum  of  what  he  has 
offered,  and  of  what  has  been  rephed,  is  this  ; — 
He  has  honeftly  declared,  as  '*  the  reiloration  of 
priminve  dilcipli^.e  cannot  rationally  be'  at- 
tempted, no  attempt  of  this  nature  will  be  made 
in  regard  of  the  Laity".  And  might  he  nor,  for 
the  fame  reafon,  in  full  fofce,  have  faid,  neither 
will  it  be  attempted  wirh  reference  to  the  Clergy  r 
But  though  it  can  no  more  rationally  be  at- 
tempted in  regard  of  the  one  ihai)  the  other  5 
yet  the  eilablifhment  of  ft ri 61  difcipline,  under  an 
Ep'ilcopate,  is  pleaded  for  in  regard  of  the  Clergy, 
to  the  intire  negledl  of  the  Laity.  And  .why  ? 
Becaufe,  if  the  Church  has  a  Biihop  here,  he  can 
*'  imimediarely  fufpend  a  fcandalous  Clergyman". 
And  might  not  a  CommiiTary  do  the  fame  as  well  ? 
And  yet,  this  is  all  within  the  reach  of  a  Bifliop's 
power,  in  confiftency  with  the  Church's  conilitu- 
tion.  For,  as  to  "depriving,  filencing  and  excom- 
municating a  fuppofed  fcandalous  Clergyman,  the 
Biihop  can  do  neither  of  them,  before  tryal  of 
the  cafe  in  fome  spiritual  court  -,  in  confe- 
quence  of  which,  the  Clergyman  may  be  acquitted^ 
and  his  fufpenfion  taken  off,  even  in  oppofuion  to 
the  remonftrance  of  the  Bifhop  himfelf.  As  to 
"  diredion,"  encouragement,  patronage,  and  refor- 
mation, by  being  under  the  eye  of  the  Bifhop", 
they  do  not  belong  to  the  affair  of  "  ftrifl 
difcipline"  -,  fo  that  however  ufefui  a  Bifhop  might 
be  in  thefc  refpeds,  it  is  nothing  to  thepurpofe  in 
that  view  of  the  argument  it  was  propofed  to  be 
here  confidered.  The  Public  will  now  judge  be- 
tween  us. 

The  Dr.  proceeds  to  the  affair  of  crdinatton^  the 
want  of  which,  he  fays,  is  [[  a  greater  difadvantage. 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfvvered.     8r 

if  pofilble,  than  the  want  of  a  regular  Governrtstni"* 
And  why  ?  For  the  following  reafons. 


One  i 

without 


s,  ''  the  danger  of  croffing  the  Atlantic^ 
which  none  can  be  admitted  to  holy- 
orders".  And  the  danger,  in  this  refpedt,  he  re- 
prefents,  "  however  tritiing  in  it's  appearance  to 
fome"  to  have  been  fo  formidable  "  in  the  appre- 
henfion  of  others,  that  it  has  dcter'd  them  from 
attempting  to  obtain  ordination".  He  then  tells 
us,  "  the  voyage  has  proved  fatal  t)  near  a  fifth 
part  of  thofe  who  have  gone  for  holy  orders".  I 
have  never  heard  of  more  than  two  to  whom  the 
fea  proved  fatal.  If  eight  more  loft  their  lives  by 
ficknefs,  it  is  no  more  than  they  mi^ht  have  done 
if  they  had  tarried  at  home.  But  be  the  "  danger'* 
great  or  fmall,  there  is  good  reafon  to  believe,  the 
going  to  England  for  ordination  is  rather  an  ad- 
vantage, than  diladvantage  to  the  Church  in  regard 
of  it's  being  fupplied.wuh  miniders.  As  to  my 
felf,  1  (hould  efteem  it  a  happy  circurnftance  in  the 
cafe,  was  1  inclined  to  take  orders  ;  and  many  I 
have  mentioned  it  to  have  declared  themfelves  to 
he  of  the  fame  mind.  And,  were  it  proper,  I 
could  name  fome  Candidates  for  the  miniftry  a- 
mong  us,  who  have  been  tempted,  by  profeHbrs 
of  the  Church  to  receive  Epifcopal  ordination, 
with  this  motive  in  fpecial,  that  they  would  have 

a    FINE    OPPORTUNITY     TO    SEE      ENGLAND.       Ic 

fhould  feem  from  hence,  as  though  going  home 
for  orders  may  be  confidered  by  Epifcopalians, 
either  as  an  advantage,or  diradvantage,according  to 
the  turn  they  have  in  view  to  ferve  for  the  prefent. 

Another   reafon    i?,  "  the  expence    of   the 

voyage,  which  cannot  be  reckoned  at  Jefs,  upon 

L  '*»o 


82    The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwergdi 

an  average,  than  one  hundred  pounds  fterling  to 
each  perlon'*.  And  this  is  aggravated  by  the  con- 
fideration,  that  *'  the  expence  muft  generally  fall 
upon  fuch,  as,  having  already  expended  the  greateft 
part  of  their  pittance  in  their  education,  will  find 
it  extremely  hard  to  raife  a  fufficient  fum  for  the 
purpofe".  I  candidly  fuppofe  the  Dr.  had  never 
feen,  or,  if  he  had,  did  not  remember  at  the  time 
of  writing,  the  account  of  the  Society,  publifhed 
in  1706,  in  which  they  fay,  pag.  74.  "all  young 
Students  in  thofe  parts  (meaning  the  Colonies) 
"who  defire  Epifcopal  ordination,  are  invited  into 
England  5  and  their  expences  in  coming  and  re- 
turning are  to  be  defrayed  by  the  Society".  Ac- 
cording to  this  invitation,  there  js  no  hardfliip,  as 
to  the  article  of  "  expence'*,  that  can  be  complain- 
ed of,  unlefs  abfurdly,  but  by  the  Society  them- 
felves  J  and  they  can^havejufL  reafon  for  com- 
plaint, as  the  money  they  expend  in  this  way 
is  as  properly  beftowed,  as  in  fupport  of  the  Mi& 
fionaries  themfclves. 

A  FARTHER,  reafon  isj  that,  "  under  thefe  dif- 
couragements,  there  has  always  been  great  diffi- 
culty m  fupplying  the  Church  with  Clergy-men^ 
and  there  always  muft  be".  Several  inftances  are 
mentioned  in  illuftration  of  this,  taken  from  Pen- 
fylvania,  Ne-vV-Jerfey,  and  North-Carolina",  where, 
as  "  Governor  Dobbs  informed  the  Society,  in 
17^4,  there  were  but  fix  Clergymen,  though  there 
were  twenty-nine  Pariflies,  and  each  Parifli  con- 
tained a  whole  County".  The  Dr.  very  juftjy 
obferves,  "  other  reafons  may  have  contributed  to 
this  want  of  Clergymen"  -,  but  it  is  really  flrangc 
he  fhould  fay,  "  it  has  always  been  prmcipally  ow- 
ing to  the  great  difficulty  of  obtaining  ordination". 

If 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered.     83 

If  this  has  been  (o  "  great  a  difficulty",  how  comes 
it  to  pais,  that  the  New  England-Colonies  have 
all  along  been,  and  now  are,  iupplied  with  Mililon- 
arles  ;  inibmuch,  that  there  arc  few,  if  any  Chur- 
phes,but  are  provided  with  them  ?  Why  (hould  the 
difficulty  be  fo  very  great  in  other  Provinces,  and 
none  at  all  in  the  New-England  ones,  or  fo  incon- 
fiderable  as  to  be  eafily  got  over  ?  If  it  was  m  it- 
fclf  a  real  and  great  difficulty,  ii's  operation  would 
be  as  powerful  in  thefe  Colonies,  as  the  other. 
Other  c^ufes  ti]uft  certainly  be  fought  for,  in  order 
i'o  account  for  this  want  of  a  fupply  of  miniders. 
And  it  is  eafie  to  point  them  out  ;  more  efpecially 
in  regard  of  "  North-Carolina",  which  is  far  more 
fparingly  provided  for,  than  either  Penfylvania,  oc 
New  Jerley  — The  Society  has  comparatively  neg- 
leded  this  Colony,  though  it's  circumftances  moft 
importunately  called  for  their  pious  and  charitable 
care,  being  deftitute  of  the  means  of  falvation  in  a 
degree  that  was  never  known  in  the  more  northern 
parts  of  America.,  Thefe,  though  in  as  full  enjoy- 
ment of  the  worffiip  of  God,  and  the  inftituted 
r.ieans  of  grace,  in  all  their  towns  and  villages,  as 
the  people  in  England,  have  yet  been  partakers  of 
the  Society^s  charity  in  fuch  large  meafures'  as  to 
incapacitate  them  from  giving  fo  full  a  fupply  of 
Clergymen  to  the  other  Colonies,  as  perhaps  they 
might  have  been  willing  to  have  done.  The  view 
indeed  of  the  Society  has  been  to  epifcopize  thefe 
Colonies,  and  this  they  have  made  their  greac 
hufmefs  -,  infomuch,  that  (hould  il  be  accomplilhed, 

IT  WILL    THEN     HAVE     BEEN     BROUGHT    TO    THE 

HAPPY  ISSUE  INTENDED,  as  w^  are  told,  in  plain 
wprds,  by  the  B:ffiop  of  Landaff,  in  his  Society- 
fermon  February  1)67.  The  Society's  capacity 
of  fupporting  Miffionaiies  is  aot  mexhaultablc  ; 
'      L  2  U^.^if 


^4     The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfvvered. 

ppcn  which  accounr,  it  is  no  wonder  they  cannot 
provide  for  inch  numbers  in  the  more  norihera 
Colonies,  and  tend  a  needful  fuj  ply  alfo  to  ihe 
foiithern  ones.  This,  I  believe,  i?,  at  boftcm,  the 
chief  rtaion  of  the  v/ant  oi  iVIifSonarics  in  the  places 
complained  of —Another  rcaion  may  be,  the  wane 
of  cate  in  th^r  Church-pcopie  to  educate  their  fon^ 
for  the  niiniJiry,  cwng,  i  luppofe,  to  their  appre- 
Jiending  {hey  would  nor,  in  this  v^'ay,  be  fo  well 
provided  for,  a.^  tluy  (liould  dtfire — Another  rea- 
lon  Itiii  may  bt,  tl;c  inLifficiency  cf  the  temptation, 
in  molt  cafes,  to  iniiuence  Candidates  among  us  to 
go  over  ;o  the  Church.  1  hey  have  a  better  prof- 
pe6t  in  continuing  wiih  U9^  than  they  wculd  have 
ihould  they  change  fides,  and  become  Epilcopali* 
ans.— -{  (hail  only  zd6^  1  never  heard  the  diiFicuhy 
of  cbrainirg  oruinatlon  given  as  a  resfon  againK 
going  f:^r  if,  by  any  one  in  this  patt  of  Amierica. 
And  1  am  perfuaded,  it  is  now  mentioned  chiefly  ia 
3  fpecuLtiv-e  v;ay,  as  carrying  with  it  aplaufible  ap-- 
pearance  to  thole  who  are  Grangers  ^o  die  Country, 

It  is  farther  mentioned,  as  a  ''  more  glaring  dlf- 
'|id vantage,  that  it  is  impoOibie  a  Bifhop,  rtfjding 
in  England,  fnould  be  fufHciently  acquainted  with 
?he  charaders  of  thofe  wjio  go  home  from  tliis 
Country  fur  holy  orders".  And  to  this  caufe  it  h 
attributed,  ^*  that  ordination  has  been  fometimcs 
fraudulently  and  furreptitioufly  obtained  by  fuch 
v^retches,  as  are  not  only  afcandal  to^the  Churchy 
buz  a  difgract;  to  the  human'  fpecies".  It  h  (aid, 
liotwithflanding  the  ^' gr/atefi;  care  and  circum-? 
^'  fpedlon  have  fucccAiveh/  been  exercifed  by  the 
^'  ^iQiops  of  London,  inibnces  have  happened, 
*'  wherein  perfons  haye  produced  inEngland  ample 
5'  wnuen  Credentials   of  their  pious  and  orderly 

^^  converfation^ 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered.     85 

^'  converfatlon,  whofe  lives  have  been  notorioufly 
"  infamous  in  this  Country,  and  after  having  been 
*'  invelled  with  the  facFed  oflice,they  have  been  fcnc 
"  back  to  take  the  charge  of  the  fouls  of  others,  in 
**  prgfecution  of  which  work,  rhey  have  adted  as  if 
*•  they  had  not,  or  imagined  that  they'had  nor,  any 
*'  fouls  of  their  own".  Had  fuch  a  charge  btcn 
pubhciy  exhibited  againft  the  Society's  Milfionaries 
by  thoie  of  thePrefbycerian  or  Congregational  per^ 
fufion,  it  would,  however  refpedlablc  they  might  be 
for  their  virtuous  integrity,  have  been  diiegarded 
at  home,  and  eiteemed  by  Epifcopalians  here  a  fure 
argument  of  inveterate  enmity  to  theChurch.  Buc 
they  can  themfelves  freely  fay  that,  v/hich,  if  others 
had  only  fuggefted,  they  would  have  bitterly  ex- 
claimed againil  them.  There  rftay  have  been  Mif- 
fionaries,  whofe  character  is  here  juflly  defcribcd  ; 
but,  1  be!ieve,it  would  be  found, upon  examination, 
that  they  v^ere  natives  of  England  or  Ireland,  and 
fent  from  home,  from  whence  they  mud  have  had 
their  ample  Credentials,  if  ihey  had  any,  and  not 
from  thisCountry.  I  knov/  of  none,who  have  gone 
from  Ameiica,  at  lead-  this  part  of  it,  to  whom  the 
alcove  dcfcripiion  can  be  juiHy  applicable  -,  nor  am 
1,  at  prefent,  inclined  to  think,  it  is  ftiidtjy  true  in 
regard  of  any  of  them. 

In  order  to  give  the  matter  a  iliil  more  plaufible 
appearance,  it  is  faid,  "  in  (uch  a  Country  as  Ame- 
rica, an  artful  man  may  fometimes  be  able  to  pro- 
cure teflim.onials  in  his  favor,  figned  by  a  compe- 
tent number  of  fuch  Cleir-Cymen  and  others  as  a 
BiQiop  of  London  will  not  know  how  to  objccl  a- 
gainlt".  What  there  is  in  *'  fuch  aCoiintry  as  this", 
more  than  in  gther  Counrries,  to  favor  a  wicked  ;irt- 
ful  man  in  procuring  fuch  teltimonials  of  his  pious 

and 


S6    The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered. 

and  regular  life  as  ^'  a  Bifhop  of  London  would  noi 
9bjc(5t  againft'*,  the  Dr.  has  not  pointed  out,  and 
1  am  utterly  at  a  lofs  to  know  his  meaning  here  ^ 
but  it  IS  tafie  to  know  thus  much,  that  he  has 
Ihamc fully  refiedled  on  the  Ep^fcopai- Clergy,  by 
faying,  that  th's  artful  man,  whofe  hie  had  been 
noioriouily  infamous  in  ihisCobniry,  might  be  able 
to  get  a  ''  competent  number  oi  them"  to  fjgn 
teftimonials  ol  his  chriftian  good  converfauon. — • 
ls[ay»  he  makes  his  ai\tful  feeker  of  orders  infamous, 
i;o  fo  high  a  degree  of  guilt,  ^s  even  to  forge 
teftimonials  in  his  own  favor.  And  to  this  he  at- 
tributes ^'the  luccefs  of  fome  adventprers  from  the 
Colonies,  who  have  obtained  ordination,  and  then 
returned  to  America  to  difgrace  thenafclves,  and 
the  Church".  It  is  ftrange  to  lee,  when  men  have 
an  end  in  view  their  heart  is  fet  upon,  what  lengths 
they  wi|l  go  m,  laying  thofe  things,  which,  if  laid 
b^  others,  would  be  attributed  to  the  powerful  in- 
fluence Oi  imbjctered  hatred  and  malice.  The  Dr. 
has  painted  the  Miffionaries,  fome  of  them  atlead, 
in  the  blackeft  colors.  They  were  never  viewed, 
by  the  woril  enemies  the  Church,  ever  had,  in  a 
light,  fq  glaringly  b^d.  It  is  very  much  doubted, 
even  by  thefc,  whether  an  infcance  can  be  given  of 
a  fingle  perfon,  fo  infamoufly  vile,  ^s  to  go  fioni 
America  with  forged  Crednetials,  in  order  to 
obtain  ordination.  One  there  v/as  who  came  from 
pngland  with  a  forged  i^icence  to  preach  •,  and 
ht^  w'as  as  notorious  a  finner  as  ever*  prophaned  a 
pulpit  ;  but  we  never  heard,  in  this  p^rt  of  the 
world,  of  any  one  who /^/r^-t  ^'Credentials  from  hence 
to.  comiC  over  v;ith  orders  to  ofjiciate  as  a  mmilter. 

But  if  it  fhould  be  fuppofed.,  that  the  whole  of 

w]iat  is  here  laid  is  ejiadly  and  hicrally  true,  might 

'  '  not 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwercd.     8> 

not  the   cafe   be  the  fame  was   there  a  Bifhop  iri 
-America?  The  greater  part   by  far  of  thole   who 
would  go  to  him  for  orders,  would  beasunknowa 
to  him,  by  reafjn  of  their  great  diftance  from  his 
feat,  as  to  a  B.ihop  in  England.     He  maft  there- 
fore depend  upon  teftimonials  from   others,    and 
thefe  might  be  forged,  or  procured  no  one  kno'is 
how,  and  there  would  be  little  lefs  danger  of  ic 
than  there  is  now.     It  is  certain,  many  no-onoufly 
wicked  perfons  in  England,  vaftly  more  in   pro- 
portion than   in    America,  have  found  ways,  by 
forging  teftimonials,  or  by  procurin^r  them,  to'  ufe 
the  Dr's  phrafe,  "  God  knows  how"^',  to  get  into 
holy  orders  ;  and  this,  though  they  are  much  near- 
er the  crdaining  BiOiop,  than  mod  of  thofe  can  be, 
in  the  Colonies,  who  may  want,  and  go  ^ro  them! 
And  the  like  legerdemain  might  aseafilyte  prad- 
ifed  here  as  there.     I  know  of  nothing,  if  it  be 
fuppofed  that  men  are   abandoned  to  atl  fenfe   of 
God  and   religion,  to  hinder  it.     Befides,  Com- 
miffaries  might  as  well  prevent   this   miichlef  as 
Bifhops,  fo  far  as   it  can   be  prevented.     And   a 
Bilhop  of  London  would  be  no  more  in  danger  of 
being  impofed  upon  by  fueh   infamous   wre?ches, 
than  a  Biihop  in  America,  if  he  would  give  orders 
to  none  but  fuch  as  came  recommended  by  a  Com- 
mifTary.     In  this  cafe,  one  muft  be  a  fool,  or  mad- 
man, fliould  he  forge  teftimonials  under  his  name  ; 
becaufe  he  would  immediately  be  detected   upori 
his  returning  hither. 

Upon  the  whole,  the  Dr.  appears  to  have  been 
as  deficient  in  his  arguing  upon  the  head  of  ordi- 
nationi  as  difcipline.  He  docs  not  pretend,  in  his 
reafoning,  that  the  Church  will  be  deprived  of  the 
benefit  of  ordination,  fliould  there  be  no  Biihop 

in 


88    The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwerecf, 

in  the  Colonies.  All  he  goes  upon  is  the  *'  danger 
2nd  expence"  that  attend  the  obtainnnent  of  it  ; 
and  that  the  Epifcopal  Churches  would  be  in 
greater  danger  of  having  vicious  Clergymen  ob- 
truded on  them.  Enough,  I  truft,  has  been  faid 
to  {hew,  that  thefe  are  pretences,  rather  plaufible 
in  appearance,  than  carrying  with  them  real  i  and 
great  weight. 

But  (houid  the  whole  of  what  the  Dr.  has  bftercd 
be  allowed  it's  full  force,  without  the  lead  abate- 
ment, there  is  no  other  hardfhip,  or  difficulty,  in 
the  cafe,  than  what  naturally  refults  frorn  pro- 
feffed  principles,  and  muft  unavoidably  follow  up- 
on them,  unlefs  an  eflablifhment  is  purpoiely  made 
in  their  favor.  The  only  proper  queftion  therefore 
is,  whether  fuch  an  eftablilhment,  at  fuch  a  diftance 
from  the  acknowledged  fupreme  head  of  the 
Church  of  England,  efpecially  in  the  prefent  flate 
of  the  American  Colonies,  may  be  thought  wife, 
expedient,  or  politic  ?  It  appears  to  us  fuch  incon» 
veniences,  or  rather  mifchiefs,  will  be  the  atten- 
dants on  it,  as  to  make  it  no  ways  proper  or  Uti 
What  thefe  are  {hall,in  it's  due  place, be  particularly 
mentioned  as  fo  many  reafons  or  objedions  againft 
an  American  Epifcopate. 


ANSWER 


ANSWER  to  Section  IV.  in  which  thi 
unparalleled  Hardfhip  of  this  Cafe  is  repre^ 
fenced. 


THE  Dr.  feems  to  think,  that  he  has  here  i 
mod  '*  fruitful  fubjedl  for  declamation"  I 
though  he  declines  to,  "  proceed  in  this  way",  and 
has  it  in  dcfign  to  "  ftate  arguments  and  fads  for 
the  confideracion  of  the  Public".  If  he  had  kepc 
this  defigti  (teadily  in  view,  he  would  have  giveii 
us  lefs  declamation,  and  more  ireafoning  that  was 
folid. 

He  begins  with  "  making  an  appeal  to  the  con-f 
fciences  of  m.en  in  behalf  of  the  Church".  And 
here,  if  he  had  fairly  *'  ilated  the  fad",  he  might 
cafily  have  known,  the  queftion  he  puts  could  noc 
have  been  anfwered  in  his  favor,  upon  an  impar- 
tial, thorow  attention  to  it.  The  fadt  placed  in  it's 
true  point  of  light  is  this.  The  greater  part  by 
far  of  the  Epifcopal-Charches,  in  thole  valtly  ex- 
tended, and  well  inhabited,  parts  of  America,  reac  h- 
ing  from  Penfylvania  fouthward,  to  Nova-Scotia 
northward,  fubfifts  chiefly  upon  the  pious  help  of 
the  Society  at  home,  at  the  expence,  it  may  be,  of 
three  thoufand  pounds  fterlin^  per  annum  •, — they 
fcannot  have  fucti  Bifliops  placed  at  their  head  as 
M  thex 


po    The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered. 

They  would  defire,  at  a  hiuch  lefs  additional  annual 
expence  of  pious  charity  , — ^^and,  leaft  going  to 
England  for  oidination  by  a  Bifhop,  conformably 
to  Epiicopalian-priiclples,  fhould  be  Ciifcouraging, 
as  it  would  be  attended  with  charge,  the  Society 
has  publicly  invited  into  England  all  young  Stu» 
dents  in  thefe  parts,  who  defire  holy  orders  ;  de- 
claring, THAT  THEIR  EXPENICE    IN  COMING  AND 
RETURNING     IS    TO    BE     DEFRAYED   BY    THE   SO- 
CIETY.     This  is  the  fadl  juftly  ftaied  ;  and,  in  this 
view  of  it,  I  believe,  no  denomination  of  chriftians, 
under  like  circumilances,  in  his  Majefty's  domini- 
ons, or  in  any  part  of  the  earth,  would  think  them- 
felves  in  the  leaft  injured  on  account  of  the  expence 
attending  the  obtainment  of  ordination.     Inflead 
of  crying  out   "  perfecution  !  intolerable   griev- 
ance" !   they  would  rather,  if  they  had  a  jufl  fenfe 
of  obligation,  feel  the  bonds  of  gratitude,  and  ac- 
knowledge they  were  kindly  dealt  with      There 
could  be  no  room^  in  this  cafe^  to  lament  the  ima- 
ginary hardfhip  of  "  not  being  allowed  a  Clergy- 
man without  paying  a  fine  of  an  hundred   pounds 
iferling  on  his  admiffion  to   orders".     And   as  to 
"  the  dangerous  procefs  that  has  proved  fatal  to  a 
fifth  part"  of  thofe  who  have  entered  upon  it,  it  is 
really  flrange  the  Dr.  fhould  again  bring  it  to  view. 
Ii:  is   no  other  than   that  common   danger  which 
thoufands  voluntarily  expofe  themfelves   to,  tho' 
they  have  nothing  more  in  profped,  than  the  plea- 
fure  of  feeing  foreign  Countries.     Befides,  this  was 
much  more  than   an  ordinary  fatality  ;    and  may 
not  happeh  again  for  hundreds  of  years.     Surely, 
the  Dr.   mull  needs   be  at   a  lofs  for  fomething 
weighty  to  fay,  or  he  would  not  have   fo  enlarged 
upon  this    comparative    trifle,  and   painted   ic   in 
iueh  hideous  colors.     And,  notwiihftanding   this 

mighty 


'Fhe  Appeal  to  the  Puhlic  anfweredf.     9t- 

pighty  grievance^  I  am  verily  perfuaded,  the  grea-' 
ter  part  of  thoic  who  are  defirous  of  holy  orders, 
was  it  at  their  option,  would  much  rather  chufe  to 
expofe  themfelves  to  the  danger  of  going  to  Eng- 
land to  obtain  them,  than  to  be  put  into  them  here. 
The  gratification  of  their  curiofity,  by  being  iri 
England,  and  getting  aquainted  with  Gentlemen 
of  worth  and  learning  there,  would  be  a  much 
(Ironger  motive  to  excite  them  to  go,  than  the 
ganger  of  going  would  be  to  keep  them  at;  home. 

The  Dr.  in  a  flufh  of  zeal,  had  fpoken  of  the 
necefTicy  of  going  home  for  orders  as  "  perfecu- 
tion".  He  feems,  upon  being  a  lictle  more  cool, 
to  retra6b  that  wor  j,  as  ^>  the  grievance  in  queftion 
does  not  arifc  from  any  pofuive  exertion  of  civil 
power"  ;  but  (lill,  it  is  ''  fomething  as  bad  in  it's 
natural  confequences'*.  And,  being  again  fudden-- 
iy  fired,  "  queltions,  whether  the  worft  perfecuti- 
pns  ever  exterminated  a  fifth  part  of  rhe  Clergy  in 
any  Country"-,  as  if  accidental  misfortunes,  men,^ 
in  all  parts  of  the  world,  readily  run  the  hazard  of, 
upon  motives  far  lefs  important,  than  thofe  go. 
upon  who  defire  holy  orders,  might  be  compa- 
red to  a  formal  perfecution  defigned  to  extermi- 
nate a  whole  Clergy,  though  it  (hould  take  eff'ccb 
Vpon  a  fifth  part  only.  The  Dr.  certainly  forgot 
be  intended  to  argue,  or  he  could  not  have  fubfti^ 
UUed  in  the.  room  of  it,  t,he  meer  flight  of  a  warm.- 
ed  imagmarion. 

He  goes  on  in  the  fame  extravagant  ftrain,  fay-; 
ing,  "  it  there  are  any  pomts,  in  which  the  reafon 
"  and  common  lenfe  of  mankind  can  be  iuppo^ed 
"  to  agree,  this  muft  unquellionably  be  one,  rhac 
«'  the  Church  of  England  in  America,  under  the 
^'  bsfore-meniioned  difadvantages,  although  noc 
M  2  :.'  forrnallf 


ht    The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwereci " 

^'  formally  perfeciited,  is  in  a  mofl  wretched  and 
«*  deplorable  condition".  It  may^  on  the  contrary, 
be  affirmed  as  a  moll  unqueftionable  truth,  and  in 
much  better  agreement  with  the  common  fenfe  of 
mankind,  that  the  Epifcopal  Churches,  in  moft  of 
the  Colonies,  are  favored  and  difiinguifhed  far  be- 
yond any  other  Churches  of  whatever  denomina- 
tion on  the  Continent,  as  the  moft  of  them,  in  fuch 
Colonies,  are  preferved  in  being  by  a  vaftly  ex- 
penfive  charity  ;  on  which  account,  infteadof  figh- 
ing  out  groans,  they  have  abundant  reafoh  for  the 
moft  gratdul  aclinowledgn^cnts. 

He  farther  fpeaks  of  it  as  "  ^n  aggravation  of 
their  unhappineTs,  that  it  a*^  pears  to  be  altogether 
n^nprecedenied  i  th.cy  being  Tingled  out  frt)m  all 
the  people  lip c) a  earth  to  be  rnade  the  firft  exam= 
pie  of  it'V  if  the  Church  was  really  in  that 
.*^-  wreichtd  deplorable  ftate**  he  would  reprefenr^ 
and  if  it  was  owing  to  downright  pofitive  perfe- 
cution,  i:  is  unaccountably  ftrange  he  fhould  men- 
tion it  as  '^3n  unprectdented  cafc'Vahd  dcfcribt  the 
Church  as  *^  firtglcd  out  «or  the  firft  example  of 
it*'.'  Did  he  never  hear  of  the'in^nitely  more' 
diftrelTecl  condiiion  of  great  numbers  that  were 
deprived,  Ened,  impriloned,  and,  in  other  ways^ 
^oft  cruelly  dealt  with,  in  the  days  of  thofe  hard- 
Ijeartcd  Aich-Brihops,  Parker,  Bancroft,  White-' 
0itr,  and  Laud  1%  Did  he  never  heat  of  any  bar- 

5^  "  Under  the  ftrfl  of  thefc  Arch-  Blihops,  above  an  lOO  5 
under  the  fecond,  above  300  pious  and  learned  menj 
v^t  on'y  members,  but  minifrers  of  the  Church,  were- 
filenced,'  fufpended,  acmonifhcd,  deprived,  many  of 
them  loade'j  \Vith  grievoui-  and  heavy  foes,  and  {hut  up- 
p.  fi!tliv  la^U:^  where  thsy  e:^pired  flowlj  through  penury 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered.     93 

barous  afls  pafTed  in  the  Reign  of  King  Charles  11, 
^ubjeding  multitudes  of  Clergymen  and  others  to 
Ibardfhips  and  fufferings,  not  to  be  thought  of  with- 
out horror  ?  *  Did  he  never  hear,  what  it  was  that 

occafiotied 
and  want.  And  what  were  the  crimes  which  drew 
this  dreadful  ftorm  of  Epifcopal  vengeance  on  them  I 
Nothing  but  their  fcruples  about  the  furplace  and  the 
cap^  about  bowing  at  the  name  ofjefuiy  about  Chriji*s 
defcent  into  helly  and  fuch-like  momentous  points*'*— 4 
Diflent.  Gent,  anfwer,  pag.  76. 

*  By  one  of  thefe  a(9:s,  no  lefs  than  two  thousand 
minifters,  many  of  them  men  of  {hining  accomplifli- 
ments,  and  all  of  them  well  fpoken  of  for  their  piety, 
were  turned  cut  of  their  livings  in  one  black  day, 
whereby  both  they,  and  their  families,  became  liable  to 
ftarve  for  want  of  the  neceflaries  of  life.  By  another, 
they  were  banifhed  five  miles  from  any  City^  Borough^ 
or  Churchy  in  which  they  had  before  miniftred  j  whereby 
it  was  put  very  much  out  of  the  power  of  their  neigh- 
bours and  friends  to  afford  them  their  charitable  relief. 
By  another  a6l  ftiil,  as  though  no  cruelty  was  too  fe- 
Vere,  they  were  forbid  meeting  for  the  worfhip  of  God 
any  where  but  in  Epifcopal  Churches,  and  under  the 
penalties  of  heavy  fines,  imprifonments,  and  even  ba- 
nifhnient  to  foreign  Countries.  ''In  confequence  of 
*'  thefe  cruel  a6ts,  vaft  numbers  of  pious  Clergymen, 
*'  with  multitudes  of  their  people,  were  laid  in  prifons 
*'  among  thieves  and  common  malefaftors,  where  they 
^'  fuffered  the  greateft  hardfhips,  indignities,  opprefli- 
««  ons  ; — their  houfes  rudely  riffled,  their  goods  made 
*'  a  prey  to  hungry  informers,  and  their  families  given 
**  up  to  beggery  and  want.  An  eftimate  was  publifti^d 
**  of  near  eight  thousand  proteftant  diffcnters,  who 
•«  had  periilied  in  prifon,  in  the  Reign  only  of  Charles 
♦'  II.  By  fevere  penalties  ir^iifted  on  them  for  afTem- 
«'  biing  to  worftiipGod,  they  fufferrd  in  their  tadcand 
•'  eftates,  in  the  compafs  of  a  few  years,  at  leaft  two 
*'  MILLIONS  ;  and  a  lift  of  sixty  thousand  perfons 
•'  was  taken,  who  had  fuffered  on  a  religious  zccouni^ 
*.%  betwixt  the  rejioraiion  and  the  rrjduiion\  Diffent. 
Qent.  anfw.  to  White,  pag.  83,  8^. 


j^4    The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwerc4 

occafioned  the  removal  of  our  fore-fathers  frcrr^ 
their  native  land,  to  this  part  of  the  new,  and  then 
defolatc  world  ?  That  they  fled  hither,  as  to  a 
place  of  fafe  retreat  fronri  the  oppreflive  power  of 
tyrannifing  BiHiops  ;  chufing  rather  to  expofe 
themlclvcs  to  external  hardfhips  and  dangers,  fadly 
grievous,  and  eAtraordinanly  trying,  than  wrong 
their  confciencts  by  i'ubnfiitting  to  meer  human 
Kripofitiuns'  in  iht  v/orfhip  of  their  maker  ?— Hav- 
ing now  heard  ihefe  things,  if  he  never  hrard  of 
them  betore,  will  he  not  fufped,  whether  the 
reprefentation  he  has  made  of  the  ^'  deplorably 
wretched  condition'*  of  the  Chv  rch  in  i^merica,  is 
not  a  little  romantic  ?  Let  it  be  fuppofed,  to  give 
his  account  it*s  full  weight,  that,  in  the  courfe  of 
fixry  years,  fihy-two  perlons  have  gone  to  England 
for  orders,  at  the  expence  of  one  hundred  pounds 
flerling  each  •,  and  that  ten  of  thefe  were  fo  unfor- 
tunate as  to  lofe  their  lives  in  the  adventure  — Lee 
it  be  fuppofed,  that  the  Church  will  be  ftill  liable 
to  the  famedanger^c  expence,  without  aBifhop. — 
Let  \i  be  fuppofed  llili  farther,  that  this  danger  and 
expence  may  be  looked  upon  as  great  a  grievance, 
as,  in  the  nature  of  the  thine;,  it  can  be.- — And 
after  all,  will  the  cafe  be  "  nn  unprecedented  one"  ? 
Is  this  "  the  firft  example"  of  a  "  condition  fo 
wretched  and  deplorable"  ?  Is  rbe  expence  of  a 
few  thoufands  in  fixry  years,  to  be  compared  w'ih 
the  heavy  fines  that  have  been  impofcd  upon  fuch 
multirudes,  at  one  time  and  another,  for  a  much 
longer  fpace  ?  Is  this  difnculty,  attending  the  aiTair 
of  ordination,  ro  be  let  in  competition  vs/irh  bemg 
filenced.  turned  out  of  living*;,  fent  to  fihhv  jaik, 
and  c^*nfined  there  to  perifn  throuoh  poverty  and 
rrjifery,  v/hich  Has  been  the  cafe  of  thoufands  ? — 
To  fpeak  of  a  few  comparatively  fmali  inconveni- 
ences^ 


the  Appeal  to  the  Piibiic  ^nfwerccJ.    '95 

cnces,  (to  mike  the  mod  of  ihem^,  as  argi/ng  a 
*'  condii'iDa  wretched  oey  >nd  all  precedent",  is  t6 
*'  declaim",  not  to  reafori  \  and  to,  do  :t  too  in  a 
manner  that  is  really  ridiculous.  I  would  aflc  the 
Dr.  yet  far  her,  are  not  liu-  DiUcMtfirs  at  home,  e- 
ven  to  this  day,  in  a  far  worle  condition  than  the 
Church  now  is,  or  ever  was,  here,  if  thf,ir  cafe  be 
co-nfidered  in  it*s  mofl  aggravated  height  ?    What 

is    an  HUNDRED     POUMDS    (Icrling  for   FifTY-TWO 

Clergymen  each,  in  the  courfe  of  sixty  years,  in 
comparifon  with  thei4uNDRED  thousand  pounds 
fterling,  many  times  told,  the  Difienttrs  have 
-paid,  m  that  time,  towards  the  fuppvr  of  the 
Episcopal-Clergy,  btfides  maintaining  their 
own  ?  And  what  is  a  much  greater  grievance  ilH, 
are  they  not,  by  "  the  pofirive  exertion  of  evil 
power",  deprived  of  rheir  Jiarural  righrs  as  men, 
by  not  being  permitted,  whiie  they  a61:  conforma- 
bly to  the  diftaces  of  their  con.'ciences,  to  iulhia 
any  poft,  ei.her  of  honor  or  profile  in  the  kingdom 
of  South-Britain  ?  Perhaps,  thefe  hardfhips,  being 
endured  by  DifTenters  only,,  may  be  thought  wor- 
thy of  little  or  no  notice.  But  DifTenrers,  to  uie 
the  Dr*s  own  words,  upon  another  occafion,  "  have 
the  fame  feelings,  the  fame  fenfibilty  with  other 
perfons,  and  are  equally  affeded  with  any  fufFcr- 
ings".  Upon  the  whole,  it  is  highly  extravagant, 
I  might  rather  fay,  to  a  great  degree  ludicrous,  to 
fpeak  of  the  Church,  in  America,  as  "  without  a 
precedent",  in  point  of  grievance,  fhould  what  has 
been  faid  be  confidered,  in  all  it's  force,  vv.thout 
the  lead  abatement.  But,  if  viewed  in  it's  proper 
light,  as  accompanied  with  the  mitigations,  and 
lefTenings  that  have  been  mentioned,  it  will  appear, 
if  Bt  all  a  grievance,  but  a  very  light  one  ;  and  fo 
mixt  with  kindnefs  as  to  give  occafion  rather  tor 

gratitude,  than  complaint. 

The 


^6    The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwereia 

The  Dr.  having/endeavoured  to  work  upon  the 
pafTions  of  the  people,  now  comes   to  try  his  fkill 
upon  thofe  in  power.     He  begins  with  claiming 
it  as  the  right  of  Epifcopalians  here  to  be  "  con- 
fidered  as  equal  with  the  foremoft,   in  every   due 
exprefTion  of  fidelity  and  loyalty".     We  won't  con- 
tend with  him,  while  he  only  makes  them  ''  equal", 
not  fiiperior,  to  the  other  denominations  of  men  in 
the  Country  ;  who  efteem  themfelves  as  flrongl/ 
bound  to  fidelity  and  loyalty  to  the  Britifh  Crown, 
upon  the  "  principles  of  Chriftianity",  as  well  as 
from  "  prefent  interell  and   inclination".     If  he 
really   meant   no  reflexion,  when  he   faid,   **  no 
trumpet  of  fedition  was  ever  heard  to  found  froni 
our  pulpits — no  words  of  fedition  have  been  fufFer- 
ied  more  privately  to   be  foWn  in  our  houfes",  as 
he  feemsto  declare  in  a  marginal  note,  we  will  find 
no  fault  j  though  fome  are  difpofed  to  think,  he 
"would  not  have  exprefled  himfelf  in  this  manner, 
unlefs  he  had  intended  an  infinuation,  that  fome«> 
thing  of  this  nature  had  been  done  by  others. 

Having  thus  proclaimed  the  extraordinary  loy- 
alty of  the  Church,  he  proceeds  to  the  work  of  ex- 
poftulation.  *'  If  then  the  Church  of  England  in 
*'  America  is  not  diftinguifhcd  by  the  want  of  duty 
*'  and  affeflion  to  the  Government,  why  fhould  it 
*'  be  thus  diftinguidied  and  (ligmatized  by  the 
*'  want  of  thofe  religious  privileges,  which  are 
*^  granted  to  all  other  denominations  of  chriftians 
*'  whatever,  in  the  Britilh  dominions'*  ?  Strangers 
to  the  real  ftate  of  things  in  the  Country  would[ 
be  naturally  and  obvioufly  led,  by  what  is  here 
faid,  to  imagine,  that  fome  great  difference  was 
fofttively  made,  by  the  Government  at  home,  be- 
twixt Epifcopalians  in  the  Colonies,  and  other  de- 
nominations 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered.     ^7 

nominations  of  chrlflians  ;  favoring  the  latter,  and 
putting  fome  "  (tiomatizmf/'.mark  upon  the  for- 
mer :  Whereas  the. truth  is,  they  are  allowed  the 
fame  liberty  with  all  other  perfuafions,  and  dt>, 
wiih  as  much  freedom  from  mokftation,  worfhip 
God  in  the  precife  way  they  themfcives  are  plealed 
jto  chufe.  All  the  differerxe  is/our  principles  do  not 
hamper  us  with  thofe  objtded  difficulties,  thtir's 
cxpofe  them  to.  He  goes  on,  ''  in  our  petitioning 
for  Bifhops,  all  that  we  afl:  for  our  fclves,  is  whac 
has  been  freely  granted  to  others^  what  has  been 
refufed  to  none  elfe  who  have  applied  for  it'*.  AA^e 
know  of  nothing  that  has  been  granted  to  others, 
and,  refufed  to  hone,  but  V/hat  is  equally  granted 
£0  them,  and  has  never  been  refufed.  No  deno- 
mination of  chriftians  in  the  Colonics  ever  aflvcd^ 
or  defiredj  mo':*e  than  free  liberty  to  ferve  God  con- 
formably to  the  didlates  of  their  confciences  ;  and 
this  liberty  t]ie  Church  enjoys,  in  common  with 
all  others.  No  \  they  are  not  upon  an  "  equal 
footing"  wlrh  their  neighbours.  So  it  fhould  feern 
thcDr.  thinks,  by  v;hat  immediately  follows.  Says 
he,  "  we  requell  only,  the  liberty  of  enjoying  the 
"  inftitutions  of  our  Churchy  and  thereby  of  being 
*'  put  upon  an  equal  footing  with  our  neighbours — 
*'  with  the  various  feds  of  Englifh  dilTenters,  who 
"  have  the  full  enjoyment  of  their  refpecSlive  forms 
"  of  Ecclefiaftical  government  and  difcipline — a. id 
"  even  with  the  Moravians  and.  Papifts,  who  are 
*'  feyerally  allowed  a  Bifhop".  It  may  be  perti- 
nently afked  here^  what  inftitution  of  the  Church 
is  not  enjoyed  here,  fave  only  confirmation,  which 
the  Dr.  has  thought  proper  to  pafs  over,  leaving 
it  out  of  the  prefent  debate  ?  As  to  "  difcipline" 
^nd  "  ordination",  he  does  not  complain,  as  in 
juftice  he  could  not,  of  the'e^  want  of  either  % 
.,         ~  N        ^  but 


5)8     The  Appeal  to  the  Pubiic  anAvered, 

but  the  only  complaint  is,  that  the  former  is  in- 
complete without  a  Bifhop,  and  the  latter  attended 
with  inconvenience.  And  is  there  no  difference 
between  n-ot' enjoying  at  all  thefe  inftitutions 
of  the  Church,  and  enjoying  them  partmily  sind 
with  inconvenience  ?  Befides,  whence  does  it  arife, 
that  Epifcopalians  do  not  enjoy  the  inftitntions  of 
religion  2iS  fully  and  completely  as  the  other  denomi- 
nations of  chriilians  ?  Can  it,  with  the  lead  appear- 
ance of  reafon,  be  afcribed  to  any  peculiar  favoir 
the  government  has  (hewn  to  thefe  denominations, 
to  the  exclufion  of  them  ?  Far  from  it.  It  is  the 
jnatural  refult  from  their  own  principles,  and  not 
at  all  owing  to  any  diftindlion  that  has  been  made 
between  them  and  other  chriilians. 

It  will,  perhaps,  be  faid  here,  if,  according  tS 
the  principles  they  profefs,  they  cannot  fully  cnjof 
the  inilitutions  of  the  Englifh  Church  without  a 
BiQi(^p  at  their  bead,  why  ihould  ihcy  be  denied 
one  ?  I  anfwer,  for  reafons  that  fhall  hereafter  be 
mentioned,  which,  I  would  hope,  will  be  thought 
fuiFicient  by  indifferent  judges.  In  the  mean  time^ 
I  vyould  only  fay,  if  the  King,  who  is  acknowledg- 
ed by  Epifcopalians  to  be  the  head  of  the  Church 
in  r\mcricc1^  as  well  as  England,  does  not  fee  fit,  in 
his  great  wifdom,  to  favor  them  beyond  any  other 
of  his  fubjects  in  the  Colonies,  as  he  muft  do  by 
fending  them  Bilriops,  which,  though  fpiritual  ofH- 
cers,  a^e  yet  greatly  expenfive  ones,  why  fhould 
they  make  fuch  bitter  complaints  ?  It  would  not 
argue  their  being  over-modefl,  if  they  efteemed 
him  as  good  a  judge  of  what  was  proper  to  be  done 
in  this  cafe,  as  themfelvcs.^  Poffibly,  he  may  think 
greater  inconveniences  would  attend  the  fettlertient 
©f  an  Epifcopate,  at  fo  great  a  diflance  from  him^ 

than 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered.     j^j 

than  thofe  that  are  confequent  upon  the  prefent  want 
of  it. — Poflibly,  he  may  be  apprehenfive,  it  might 
prove  an  occafion  of  ''  butcrncfs,  envy,  angv-r, 
wrath,  clamor,  ftrife,  and  evil-fpeakinyi",  thoie 
"  works  of  the  flclh",  which  are  dtlbudive  of  all 
true  rehgion. — PolTibly,  he  may  fear  fome  ill  effeds 
relative  to  the  ftate. — But,  whjcever  the  reafons 
are,  which  redrain  his  Majefty  from  eflablifliing 
Bifhops  in  America,  his  wiie  pleafure  (hould  cer- 
tainly make  them  eafie  ;  efpecially,  as  ihey  own 
him  to  be  the  fupreme  Governor  of  the  Church, 

Im  aggravation  of  theChurch's  "  unprecedented" 
hardiliip,  the  Dr.  goes  on  to  fay,  in  "'  a]  ortoHc 
times",  care  was  taken  to  form  chriftian?,  as  ihey 
increafjd,  into  "  proper  Ecclefiaftical  diilridts,  and 
to  appoint  Bifliops  for  each".  If  he  means,  that, 
as  "  the  number  of  difciples  was  multiplied'*,  rhey 
were  "  added  to  the  Churches"  in  rhefe  and  thofe 
places,  which  had  padors  at  their  head  ;  or  were 
Jprmed  into  new  Churches  with  pailors  over  thtm, 
this  is  very  true  :  And  we  heartily  wifh,  that  all 
the  Churches  in  America  had  fuch  Padors,  or  Bi- 
fnops.  Bat  if  he  intends,  that  chridians  were,  in 
thofe  days,  "  formed  into  diflrids  wi;h  BidiopG 
over  them",  in  any  meafure  conformable  to  ihe 
manner  of  the  Church,  of  England,  cr  that  which 
is  intended  for  the  Church  in  America,  he  is  grofly 
n^iilakcn.  There  were  tlien  no  fuch  diflnds  or 
Billiops.  And  if  we  purlue  the  hiilory  of  the 
Church,  through  the  times  that  may,  wirh  any 
propriety,  be  called  truly  priniiii/e,  we  ihjll  me^t 
wich  no  m dance  of  this  kind  ;  nor  can  an  inflan,<:c 
be  produced,  until  there  had  ''  come  a  falling  a- 
v/ay  fird",  and  that ''  man  o(  fin"  began  to  be  *'  re^ 
7?aied",  who  hath  oppofed  himfcif  lo  ail  that  it 
N   z  '        •     called 


foQ    The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered« 

called  God,  or  that  is  worfhipped  ;  fo  that  he,  as 
God,  has  fet  in  the  ten-^ple  of "  God,  {hewing  that 
Jie  was  hinr4rdf  God". 

The  Dr.  by  recuring  to  the  *^  records  of  Pa- 
ganifm  and  Mahon-ietanifm'*,  to  magnitie  the  neg- 
ied  of  the  Church  in  America  by  his  fuperiors  in 
England,  is  both  ungratrfui  and  unreafonable.— • 
He  is  ungraceful,  as  ihey  have  for  more  than  fixty 
years  been  expreifing  their  pious  regards  to  it,  by 
expending,  at  the  loweft  cordputation,  ihkry  thou- 
(and  pounds  fterling  to  promote  it's  growth.     And 
he  is  as  unreafonable,  in  that,  notwithftandiug  the 
difcovery  of  fo  much  concern  for  the  Church   in 
the  Colonies,  he   would  make  them  even    worfe 
than  ^^.  Pagans",  or  *'  Mahometans",  becaufe  they 
do  not  gratifie  hb  foad  defires  in  eftabJifhing  an 
Epifcopate  here,  after  the  mode  of  the  Church  at 
|idme.     Let  mc  take  this  opportunity  to  remind 
the  Dr.  once  for  all,  that,  as  it  lies  with  the  King, 
"whether  they  fnall,  or  fhall  nor,   have   Bifhops   ia 
America,  iall  his  complaints  finally   terminate    on 
him  :  For  this   reafon,  I  could   wifh  he  had  ex- 
preficd  more   dutiful  reverence   towards  his  Sove- 
reign, than  to  charge  him,  as  he  does  virtually,  and 
in  reality  of  contlrudion,  with  treating  the  Church 
here  with    '^unparalleled  hardship  ;  per- 
SEcuTioM,  or  what    is   as  bad   in  it's  conse- 
(^UENCES  J  yea,  with  neglect  so  grievous  as 
not  to  be  precedented",  either  by  Pagans,  or 
Mahometans.     It  is  hoped,   the  Clergy  of  the 
Church  of  England,  in  their  addrefs  to  his  iVlajefly, 
|iave  fpoken  to  him  ^ith  more  decency,  aad  be- 
(^oming  reverence. 


!####! 


ANSWER, 


ANSWER  to  Section  V.  affigning  Rca- 
fons  why  the  Church  in  America  has  been 
thus  neglec5led. 


^'^ '^^^v^»^^^».j5r'^^^Si^^''*^^S6-'^^  V<P" 


THIS  Se6lion  would  have  been  wholly  pafTed 
over,  as  we  have  no  concern  with  the  more 
infi'mediate  contents  of  it,  but  that  the  Dr.  has, 
here  and  there,  mixt  with  his  realbns,  why  the 
Church  has  been  fo  greatly  neglefted,  fome  mat« 
ters  of  intelligence  it  may  be  fit  to  take  into  con- 
fideration. 

The  firft  I  would  mention  is  thus  exprefled, 
*.*  the  propriety  offending  a  Bifhop  to  thefe  Colo- 
nies", that  is,  the  Colonies  that  were  fettled  by 
thofe  who  had  an  averfion  to  Epifcopal  govern- 
ment, "  will  be  difputed  by  none".  This  is  no- 
thing more  than  a  ratrle  to  pleafe  children  with. 
If  a  Bifhop  is  fent,  will  he  have  nothing  to.  do  in 
thefe  Colonies  ?  Will  they  not  be  part  of  his  Dio- 
cefs  ?  Will  not  the  Epifcopal-Churches  in  them, 
at  lead  their  Clergy,  be  under  his  infpedVion  and 
government  ?  All  that  can  be  meant,  by  the  "  ac- 
l;nowledged  impropriety"  of  fending  a  Bifhop  to 
thefe  Colonies,  is  only  this,  that  it  may  not  be 
proper  he  fhould,  at  prefent,  have  his  feat  here. 
But  (till,  he  will  be  as  completely  fettled  at  the 

head 


102     The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfweredo 

head  cf  the  Epifcopal  Clergy,  within  thefe  bounds^ 
as. in  *the  other  Colonies  ;  and  will  have  the  fame 
right  of  fuper-intending  and  governing  them.  So 
that,  if  his  place  of  reiidence  Ihould  not  be  here, 
fcb  power  will  ;  and  it  will  be  the  faqie,  in  all  it's 
^xeicifes,  as  in  any  of  the  other  Provinces  :  No^ 
are  we  fo  dtftitute  of  forefight  as  not  to  fee,  that 
it  will  be  thought  as  "  proper",  a  B.fhop  fhould 
have  h\s  feat  in  thefe  Colonies,  as  in  any  of  the  o- 
ther,  whenever  a  fit  opportunity,  with  promifing 
circumflancesj  fliali  prelentp 

Another  piece  of  intelligence  we  are  let  into 
5s,  that  however  '^negligent'*  and  "  ftupid"  the 
Epifcopalians  here  have  been,  about  the  affair  of 
^n  Epilcopate  in  America,  it  has  engaged  the  at- 
tention of  their  fuperiors  at  home  for  more  than 
fixty  years.  "  The  worthy  Society,  to  whom  the 
nation,  and  the  chriftian  world,  in  general,  are  un- 
der great  obligations,  and  to  whofe  unexampled 
liberality,  indefatigable  application,  and  amazing 
pcrfcverance,  the  Church  of  England  owes  it's 
VERY  EXISTENCE,  at  this  day,  in  some  of  the 
Colonies"  ;  I  fay,  this  Society  in  particular  has 
moft  heartily  and  vigoroufiy  employed  it's  pains  in  ' 
profecution  of  this  good  work,  .by  '^  m.aking  all 
proper  rcprtrfentations  of  the  cafe  to  Qj-ieen  Ann 
in  her  day"  •,  by  "  piirchafing  a  houle  in  New- 
Jerlcy,  for  the  refidence  of  a  Billiop"  lome-  rim»e 
after  ;  by  ''  obtaining  an  order  from  the  Crown 
tor  a  bill  to  be  drawn,  and  laid  before  the  Parlia- 
ment for  eilabliQiing  an  American  EpifcopJte  ;  by, 
attemplSbg  the  hm^  thing,  with  the  fame  fpirir,' 
the  next  reign,  and  with  an  encouraging  profpect 
of  fuccelV  :  And  the  ''  venerable  Patrons  and. 
Supporters  of  the  Church  ia  America",  this  fame 

worthV 


*f  he  Appeal  to  thet^ublic  anfwercd.     103 

worthy  Society,  "  have  continued  to  keep  fight  of 
this   great  objedl,    and     have    been    watching 

FOR  SEASONABLE  OPPORTUNITIES  OF  EXERTING 
THEMSELVES    TO    OBTAIN    IT".       Who    nOW    Carl 

be  at  a  lofs  to  know  the  true  reafon  of  the  appli- 
cation of  fuch  vail  fums  of  money,  in  thofe  Colo- 
nies that  ftood  in  little  or  no  need  of  fuch  pious 
charity  !  Who  can  help  yielding  the  fall  aflent  of 
his  mind  to  this  affirmed  truth,  that  it  is,  in  the 
opinion  of  Epifcopalians  here,  and  their  fuperiors 
at  home,  an  "  indifpuced  impropriety"  to  fi;<  a 
Bifiiop  in  the  New-England  Colonies,  fhould  the 
way  be  duly  prepared  for  it  1 

I  SHALL  here  add  to  the  intelligence  the  Dr.  has 
given  us,  that  there  never  was  a  time,  fince  the 
incorporation  of  the  Society  for  the  propagation 
of  the  Gofpel,  wherein  fuch  earned  and  vigorous 
efforts  were  made,  both  in  the  Colonies  and  in 
England,  to  obtain  the  long  wifhed-for  bleffing, 
an  American-Epifcopate.  No  pains  have  been 
wanting,  no  methods  k^ft  untried,  in  order  to  bring 
this  into  event:.  The  whole  Clergy  of  the  Church 
of  England  here  are  unired  in  their  endeavours  ; 
and,  without  all  doubt,  have  been  fpirited  hereto 
by  inftrudtions  from  thofe,  in  high  dignity  at  home, 
who  have  promifed  their  influence  and  afuftance 
in  an  affair  of  fo  great  importance.  Surely  the 
Dr.  had  no  need  to  have  taken  up  fo  much  of  the 
preceding  fedion,  in  fetching  arguments  from  the 
apoftolic,  and  fucceeding  times  -,  yea,  from  tie 
records  of "  Paganifm'*  and  "  Mahome^anifm", 
to  excite  in  fuperiors  there  companion  towards  the 
poor  American  Church,  in  it's  '*  deplorable  Wt-etch- 
ed  condition"  ;  or  rather  to  fhame  them  for  their 
heglea  in  taking  fo  little  care  of  it's  interefl.  Per- 
haps, 


164     The  Appeal  to  the  Pub!ic  anfwere?!!; 

haps,  there  never  was  a  Church,  in  any  chriftian 
Colony,  in  any  part  of  the  earth,  thai  has  had  more 
done  for  it,  or  that  has  been  the  objedl  of  a  more 
folhcitous  concern  in  the  minds  of  better  friends^ 
and  more  able  Patrons.  It  muft  not  be  efteemed 
a  matter  of  wonder,  if  we  are  fo  far  alarmed,  as  to 
confider,  and  fpekk  freely  upon  fo  intereiling  aii 
occafion.-^^ — 

The  laft  article  of  Int:e]ligence  relates  to  the  ex- 
ternal circumfiances  of  the  Bifhop  that  is  defired 
to  be  feht  to  America.  "  A  feat  has  been  pur- 
dhafed  for  his  refidence,  at  riK  hundred  pounds 
flerling  expence,in  a  coriveniencManfion-houfe  ana 
lands,  fituate  at  Burlington  in  the  Jerfeys'*,  And^ 
as  the  Dr.  declares  elfewhere,  pag.  108.  "a  fund 
*'  has  been  eiiabliflied  for  this  particular  purpofe^ 
*•  (the  fupport  of  a  Bifhop)  for  more  than  half  a 
*'  Century  pafl  5  and  many  worthy  perfcns  have 
^"^  contributed  generouily  and  largely  to  the  in- 
*'  creafe  of  it".  Says  he,  '*  I  can  recoiled,  as  I 
*'  am  writings  the  following  inftances  :  Arch- 
*'  Bifliop  Tennifo?!^  who  has  been  dead  upwards  of 
*'  fifty  years,  bequeathed  to  it  one  thousand 
*'  POUNDS  fterling  ;  Sir  Jonathan  Trelawners,  near 
*'  the  fame  time,  another  thousand  pounds  ;  the 
*'  Lj2idy Eliza helbHqftifjgs^F IV :.  hundred  pounds; 
*'  Bishop  Bui  ler,  five  hundred  pounds*,  Bilhop 
*'  Benfo7i^  TWO  hundred  pounds;  Bifhop  Of- 
*^  l?aldaftony  five  hundred  pounds;  and  iVir, 
"  Fijher^  one  thousand  pounds.  Thefe,  and 
**  all  other  fums,  which  the  Society  have  received! 
"  for  this  ufe,  were  put  into  the  public  funds  as 
*'  foon  as  paid  into  their  hands,  and  have  been  ac- 
"  cum.ulating  ever  fince,  excepting  what  they  ex- 
*'  pendcd  at   Burlington.     If  this    ftock  is   not 

■  •   '    ■        "  fufficienC 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anrwerei     ioi 

"  fuiBcient  for  the  fupport  of  a  proper  Epifcopate 
"  in  America,  I  imagine  the  diUcuhy  of  making  ic 
*'  fufiicient  will  not  be  great.  For,  as  many  have 
"  given  liberally  on  the  remots  prc/pe^  of  it's  be- 
"  ing  needed,  it  is  not  to  be  doubted  but  bene- 
"  faSors  will  be  raifed  up,  when  afliftance  fhali  be 
"  called  for  by  z  prefent  72ccejfitf\ 

,  It  is  unqueflionable,  from  thefe  paifagcs,  if  a 
Bifhop  is  fent  to  America,  that  fuch  provifion  mufl: 
be  n^ade  for  his  fupport,  as  will  enable  him  to  ap- 
pear in  all  the  grandeur  of  a  Bifhop  in  England. 
His  place  of  refidence,  and  manner  of  living,  muft 
exceed  a  common  Clergyman's  in  proportion  to  his 
much  more  exalted  ftation  in  the  Church.  Such  Bi« 
fhops  were  unknown  in  the  chriflian  world,  in  it's: 
firft  days  of  purity  :  Nor  do  we  read  of  them,  until 
chriftians  had  groQy  departed  from  that  fim- 
plicity  in  living,  which  was  their  pri^iiitive  glory« 
At  fo  great  a  dillance  from  apoftolic  times  as  the 
third  Century,  though  corruption  had  then  crcpc 
into  the  Church,  Paul  of  Samofata,  Bifhop  of  An- 
tioch,  and  one  of  Cyprian's  contemporaries,  was 
depofed,  among  other  things,  for  this,  "  that,  hav- 
ing been  poor  before  he  was  Bifnop,  he  had  after 
that  grown  very  rich,  born  fecular  dignities,  paffed 
the  ftreets  with  a  train  of  attendants,  and  eredled  to 
himfelf  a  magnificent  feat  in  the  Church".  *  Nay, 
a  good  while  after  this,  though  the  Church  had 
grown  (till  more  corrupt,  the  fourth  council  of 
Carthage  decreed,  "  that  the  Bifhop  fhall  have  a 
little  dwelling-houfe  near  theChurch  -,  that  he  fhall 
have  but  courfe  houfhold-ftuffand  diet,  and  feek 
his  reputation  only  by  found  doftrine,  and  a  good 
life  ;  that  he  fhall  not  fpend  his  time  in  caring  for 

O  hH 

^  Eufeb,  Lib.  7.  Cap.  3O0 


16(5    The  Appeal  to  the  PubUc  anfweted'o 

bis  famiiy,but  be  employed  wholly  in  rcading.pray-*" 
ing,  and  preaching  the  word  of  God".  ^  And  Ibmd 
of  our  reformers,  of  high  diftindion  in  the  Church, 
have  freely  fpoken  againfl  the  opulence  and  gran- 
deur of  Bifhops.  Says  the  good  Arch-Bifhop  Cran  - 
hier,  in  a  letter  to  my  Lord  Crortiwel,  "  Even  at 
*'  the  beginning  of  Chrift's  profeflbrs,  'Diotrephes 
*'  defired  to  h2L\t  prehe?nmence  in  theChurch.  And 
"  fince,he  hath  had  more  fucceflbfs,  than  all  the  A- 
"  poftles  had  ;  of  whom  have  come  all  thofe  glori- 
*'  ous  titles,  ftiles  &  pomps,  into  the  Church.  But 
"  1  would,  that  I,  and  all  my  brethren  the  Bifhops, 
*'  would  leave  all  our  ftiles,  and  write  the  ftile  of 
"  our  offices,  calling  oiirlelves  the  Apcjlles  ofChrift  : 
"  So  that  we  took  hot  upon  us  the  name  vainly,  but 
*'  were  fo  even  in  deed.  So  that  we  might  ordtf 
"  ourDiocefs  in  iuch  fort,  that  neither  paper,  parch- 
'*^  hiehr,  lead  or  wax,  but  the  very  chriflian  ccnver- 
*'  fation  might  be  the  letters  6c  feals  of  our  offices  ; 
*'  as  theCorihthians  were  to  Paul,  to  whom  he  faid> 
*'  ye  are  the  letters  and  feals  cf  our  Apofilefhip"  -f 
To  the  like  purpofe  are  thofe  words  of  the  famous 
Bidiop  Hooper,  "  They  [the  Bifhops]  know,  that 
*'  the  primitive  Church  had  no  fuch  Bifhops  as  be 
*'  now-a-days.  If  the  fourth  part  of  the  Bifhcprick 
"  remained  unto  the  Bidiop,  it  were  fufBcient  ;  the 
*'  third  part  to  fuch  as  fhould  teach  good  learning  ; 
*'  the  fecond  part  to  the  poor  of  the  Diocefs ;  and 
*'  the  other  to  maintain  fnen  of  war  for  the  fafe- 
"  guard  of  thecommoh-wealth,  it  were  better  be- 
"  itowed  a  great  deal.  For  now  it  is  ill  ufed  and 
*'  beftowed  for  the  greater  part  upcn  thofe  that  have 
*'  no  need  of  it. — if  any  man  be  offended  with  me 
*'  for  rhus  faying,  he  loveth  not  his  own  health,  nor 
«*  God's  laws,  no  man's,  out  of  which  I  am  always 

"  ready 

*  Can.  I4j  17,  20, 24.    t  Pierce's  Viiid.DifTen.  p.  3704 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered.     loy 

"  readytoprovethethingfaidtobetrue".*  Riches, 
if  wemaybelieve  the  word  of  truth, are  attendedwith 
dangerous  temptations  -,  infomnch,that  iris  really  a 
difficult,  extremely  difficult,  thing  for  one  poiTcfled 
pf  them, to  prevent  his  being  *'  drawn  afide  by  thofe 
lulls,  whjch  drown  men  in  perdition'*.  Men  are 
too  r^ady,  if  they  are  much  raifed  above  others  in 
worldly  circumftances,  to  grow  big  in  their  own  ap- 
prchenfions,  to  be  haughty  and  imperious ;  treating 
thjfe  below  them,  v/ith  infolence  and  ccmtempt. 
They  are  too  apt  to  let  their  hearts  "  upon  thaC 
which  is  not"  ;  to  live  high,  keeping  fumptuous 
fables  ;  to  fp^^nd  their  time  in  eafe  and  indolence, 
to  the  dilTipation  of  their  minds,  and  unfitting  them 
for  thofe  fpi ritual  exercifes,  without  which  they  wili 
have  little  relifh  for  the  things  of  God  and  religion; 
And,  perhaps,  this  has  been  as  common  among  the 
Clergy,  ^s  any  other  order  ^f  men  ;  not  excepting 
Bifhops  themfelves.  The  excellent  Bifiiop  Burner, 
fenfible  of  this,  in  an  ^ddrefs  to  his  brethren,  and 
fuccefibrs  in  the  Epifcopal  office,  thus  exprefTes 
himlelf,  '*  I  wiffi  the  pomp  of  living,  and  the  keep- 
"  ing  high  tables,  could  he  quite  taken  away.  Ic 
*'  is  a  great  charge,  and  no  very  decent  one  •,  a 
*^  great  devoiirerof  time,  a^d  wi.U  make  you  look 
'^^  too  like  the  men  of  the  world.  I  hope  this  is  a 
^'  burdc^n  to  you  \  it  was  indeed  one  of  the  grear- 
•^^  eft  burdens  of  my  lir<?,  to  fee  fo  much  time  lod-, 
'-^  and  to  be  living  in  a  luxurious  courfe,  whkK 
''•  might  have  been  much  better  bellowed.  I  had 
*'  uot  ftrength  enough  to  break  thsough  t^iat, 
"  which  cuPcom  has  inipofedon  thole  provided  with. 
"  plentiful  B;fiiopricks.  I  pray  God  to  help  yoa 
6ad  a  decent  way  of  laying  this  down".  ^    Kiches 

Q  ^  ^^A 

^  Ibid.   pag.  392.  I  Hiil,  of  his  own  timr* 

Vol.  Vi.  pag.   i88.  ^ 


'JpS    'The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered 

and  poverty  are  both  extremes,  neither  of  which 

feem  futable  for  Clergy- men.     '^  Gonveniency  of 

food  and  raiment"  for  them,  and  their  families,  is 

rather  defirable.     More  than  this  ;  to  be  fure,  an 

abundance  of  the  world  will  be  dangerous  to  them, 

and  greatly  hurtful  to  the  Church  of  God.     This 

is  a  truth  in  fad,  and  known  to  be  fo.     Chriftia- 

nity  never  fuffered  fo  much  by  all  it's  perfecutions 

by  Pagan-powers,  as  by  the  ponip  and  grandeur  of 

the  Clergy,  efpecially  of  fuperior   orders.     The 

tiches  of  the  Church,  under  the  Patronage  of  thofe 

Princes  of  thq  earth  who  were  called  it's  *'  nurfing 

fathers",  have  been  it's  ruin,  by  being  the  cccafion^ 

through  abufe,  of  thofe  numerous  abominations^ 

which  have  moil  fhamefully  defiled  the  temple  of 

Goda     I  am  therefore  free  to  declare  it  my  hearty 

wi(h,  that  vye  may  never  .have  a  Clergy,  in    the 

American  v/orld,  for   whofe   refidence  fine   feats 

inuff  be  provided,  and  funds  eftablilhed  to  bring 

in  an  income  much  better  futed  to    maintain  offi° 

cers  in  a  kingdom  of  this  world,  than  that  which 

is  related  to,  and  pertains  to  another,  that  is  purely 

fpiritual.     And  1  wifli  this,  not  only  in  regard  pf 

the  Epifcopal-Clergy,  but  the  Clergy  of  every  de» 

jnominacion  on    the  Continent  s  y-3,  the  whois 

phriftian  v/orld. 


■ANSWER 


ANSWER  to  Section  VI.  which  fays  the 
prefent  Jgnflure  is  apprehended  to  be  favorable 
to  the  Epifcopate  in  queftion. 


THE  Dr.  here  fpeaks  of  it  as  "  the  opinion  of 
many  wife  and  judicious  perfons,  that  the 
favourable  opportunity'',  for  eftablllhing  an  Ame- 
rican Epifcopate,  "  now  prefents  itfelP*  ;  an  op- 
portunity, which  "  the  circumftances  of  the  nation 
have  never,  until  now,  afforded".  Bur,  what  are 
thefe  circumftances,  which  make  the  prefent,  fo 
favourable  an  opportunity  ?  "  The  tumults  of  war 
have  ceafed,  and  the  public  tranquility  reftored, 
without  any  reafonable  fufpicion  of  a  fpeedy  inter- 
ruption". Was  this  never  the  cafe  before,  and 
within  the  memory  of  the  Dr.  himfelf  ?  If  he  will 
only  refledl  a  little,  he  may  bring  to  mind  a  time, 
fince  he  became  capable  of  noticing  fa^ts,  when 
*'  the  circumftances  of  the  nation"  v/ere  fo  very 
like  to  thefe,  that  he  will  not  find  it  an  eafie  mat- 
ter to  point  out  the  difference.  And  are  there  "  no 
reafonable  fufpicions  of  a  fpeedy  interruption  of 
the  prefent  tranquility"  ?  He  herein  appears  a 
ftranger,  not  only  to  the  known  difpofition,  and 
paft  conduct,  of  both  France  and  Spain  towards 
England,  but  to  what  they  have  been  doing  ever 
finqe  the  conclufion  of  the  late  war  to  ftrengthen 
^.  their 


no     The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered, 

their  naval  force,,  and  put  themfelves  In  a  capacity 
to  break  the  prefent  peace. — Again,  "  the  greateft 
harmony  fubfifts  between  our  Mother- country,  and 
mofl  of  the  Colonir-s  ;  the  late  difpute  having  been 
brought  to  a  happy  termination".  It  is  true,  the 
difpute,  relative  to  the  Stamp-Act,  has  been  hap- 
pily terminated.  But  has  nothing  intervened  fince, 
that  has  difturbed  the  harmony  betv/een  the  Mo- 
ther-country, and  the  Colonies  ?  Are  ^'  moft  of 
the  Colonies"  quite  fatisfied  with  the  doings  at 
home,  brought  into  effed  with  reference  to  them  ? 
One  would  think,  by  the  reprefentation  here  made 
of  them,  that  the  Dr.  had  been  fhut  up  from  the 
world,  and  knew  not  what  was  pafiing  in  it.  1  here 
is  nothing  more  certain,  than  that  *'  mod  of  the 
Colonies"  think  themfelves  as  nearly  touched  in 
their  CONSTITUTIONAL  RIGHTS  by  the  late  Par- 
liamentary proceedmg,  as  by  the  Stamp-Act  it- 
felf  •,  and  they  are  every  day  groaning  out  their 
complaints  •,  though  they  are  refolved  tp  do  it  in 
thofe  ways  that  are  legal.  It  is  ftrange,  that  pre- 
judice itfclf,  though  fpcakingto  pro;riote  a  favour= 
ite-point,  fhould  publicly  fayp  that  ^'  i\\t  greateft 
harmony  now  fiibiiiled  between  the  Iv] other- 
country,  and  moft  of  the  Colonies".  No  fact  re- 
lated for  truth  was  ever  more  diflant  from  it.-— 
l^'arther,  *'  the  plan  of  an  American-Epiicopate. 
has  been  fettled,  and  adjufted  in  fuch  manner,  that 
the  religious  privileges  of  none  can  bv  violated,  or 
endangered".  By  whom  has  this  plan  been  fettled 
and  adjufted  ?  We  have  no  good  reaion  'o  think, 
that  it  has  been  done  by  thofe,  who  have  any  con- 
ilitutional-right  to  meddle,  of  their  own  mttr  mo- 
tion, with  matters  of  this  nature  •,  ard  we  flia^ll 
fee,  in  proper  time,  that,  if  it  has  bc^cn  fcii'ed,  it 
is  not  fo  adjulledj  but  that  the  privileges,  even  of 

PJ-pifcopalians^ 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfWered.     i  i  1 

Epifcopalians,  will  be  violated  by  it.— As  to  what 
follows,  relating  to  "  the  happinefs  of  having  a 
Prince  upon  the  throne,  who  is  unqueftionably 
difpored  to  promote  the  general  intercit  of  virtue 
and  religion",  ithe  other  denominations  are  as 
thankful  as  the  Epifcopalians  can  be  ;  but  do  not 
!ook  upon  this  an  argument  more  favoring  their 
caufe  than  our's.  We  can  chearfully  rely  on  the 
impartial  juftice  and  goodnefs  of  the  Britifli  Sove- 
reign, not  in  the  lead  doubting  his  equal  paternal 
regard  to  all  his  loyal  Colonics  of  whatever  clafs. 
We  know  not  what  "  declarations  h^  has  made  on 
the  fubjedb  of  an  American-Epifcopaie"  ;  but  fhis 
we  have  abundant  reafon  to  believe,  that  he  will 
do  nothing  in  this  matter^  but  what  is  wifely  and 
kindly  fitted  to  promote  the  real  good  of  his  fub- 
je6ls  here,  not  confidered  feparately,  but  in  one 
colledive  view  ;  v/hich  is  all  we  defire. — Thefe' 
now  are  ''  the  advantages",  which,  as  the  Dr.  fays, 
*'  peculiarly  mark  the  prefent  period".  But  they 
all,  excepting  the  lafl,  which  is  as  favourable  to  us 
as  them,  may  be  juftly  looked  upon  as  real  difad- 
vantages,  pointing  out  the  prefent,  as  the  moft  in- 
convenient jundure  that  could  be  pitched  upon, 
for  the  accomplifliment  of  the  great  thing  deflfed. 

The  Dr.  now  goes  oh  to  "  other  arguments 
for  fending  Bifliops  to  America,  never  fo  urgent 
and  forcible  as  at  prefent'*. 

One  is,  the  "  great  increafe  "  of  profeflbrs  of 
the  Church.  "  In  the  former  part  of  this 
Century,  they  were  fmall  and  inconfiderable  in 
icomparifon  with  the  amount  of  their  prefent  num- 
ber". He  is  pleafed  to  fay,  *'  that  the  Church  of 
England  in  America  contains  now  near  a  MILLIo^x 

of 


trs     The  Appeal  to  the  Public  aiifwei-eaa 

of  members".  This  is  more  than  once  repeated 
in  other  parts  of  his  performance  ;  and  the  like 
account,  we  have  been  informed,  has  been  inferted 
in  the  petitions,  the  Epifcopal-Clergy  have  fent 
home  to  befpeak  the  intereftof  their  Tuperiors  with 
reference  to  the  mifiion  ofBifhops  to  the  Colonies. 
It  is  furprifing,  they  (hould  publifh  it  to  the  v/orldi 
that  their  Church  containts  To  great  a  number. 
They  mud  certainly,  in  order  to  inhance  the  ac- 
count, reckon  the  Negkoe-Slaves  *  among  the 

members 

^  The  Dr.  for  reafons  heft  known  (o  himfelf,  did  not 
chufe  to  fay,  in  plain  words,  that  Negroes,  knowing 
nothing  of  religion,  make  a  very  large  part  of  his  Mil- 
lion of  the  '^  members  of  the  Church  of  England", 
But  it  is  evident,  he  has  thefe  in  referve  to  fave  the 
truth  of  his  affirmation.  He  fays,  pag.  55,  "from  ge- 
neral calculations  it  has  been  frequently  faid,  of  late 
years,  that  the  proper  fubjefls  of  the  Britifli  Crown  in 
America  amount  to  tbrge  millions'^  And  again,  pag.  89. 
*'  of  the  inhabitants  of  this  Country  a  fttll  third  pari 
belongs  to  the  Church".  Now,  if  there  are  not,  as 
the  Dr.  will  not  pretend  that  there  are,  three  ?nUlion  of 
inhabitants,  6r  Britifh  fubjeif^s,  unlefs  the  Blacks  are 
reckoned,  the  Church  cannot  have  belonging  to  it  a 
third  part,  or  one  millicny  of  thefe  inhabitants,  if  the 
blacks  are  left  out  of  the  account.  This  is  more  evi- 
dent ftill,  from  vi^hat  the  Dr.  fays  of  the  furvey  that 
was  made  of  the  number  of  inhabitants,  in  1762.  His 
words  are,  pag.  55,  *^  It  was  then  found,  that  they  a- 
mounted  to  between  two  and  three  million  in  the  Co-* 
lonies,  and  Iflands*'.  Of  thefe,  fays  the  Dr.  pag.  57,' 
*'  The  blacks  were  found  to  be  about  eight  hundred  and 
forty  four  thoufand'*.  A  large  dedudion  then  muft 
be  made  from  the  Million  profefTors  of  the  Church, 
if  the  blacks  are  not  counted.  And  in  truth,  the  Dr. 
himfelf  virtually  acknowledges  it ;  though,  perhaps,  he 
did  not  intend  the  acknowledgment  fhould  be  perceived. 
For  he  fays,  pag,  56,  «  of  the  Whites"  ^   that  is  in 

the 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anlwcfed.     ii^^ 

members  of  their  Church"  ;  though  not  one  iri 
fifty  of  them  know  any  thing  nv  re  of  Chtiftianity^ 
than  thofe  of  the  fame  color  who  live  in  Africa  : 
Ochcrwife,  it  is  not  poffible  their  account  fhould 
confift  with  truth.  In  the  tWo  Provinces  of  l^cn- 
fylvania  and  the  jerfies,  there  are  no  more  thari 
three  Epiicopal  Churches  that  fupport  themftlvesi 
The  Society,  if  we  may  depend  on  iheir  abftradsj 
have  but  nineteen  Miffionaries.  The  Dr.  fays^ 
there  are,  in  thefe  Colonies,  a  confiderable  number 
of  Churches  and  Congregations  v^^i'hour  Clergy- 
men. It  is  reafonably  fuppofed,  thtlc  oeftiiucc 
Congregations,  for  much  the  greater  part,  are 
fimilar  to  the  fcattered  handfuls  of  Epifcopalians 
in  fome  of  our  New-England  towns,  confiding,  in 
fome  places,  of  three  or  four  -,  in  others,  of  half  a 
dozen  ;  in  others  flill,  of  a  dozen  or  fifteen  fa- 
milies. However,  that  there  might  be  ho  com- 
plaint that  we  are  difpofed  to  lefien  their  real 
number,  we  fhall  reckon  them  all  as  Congrega- 
tions equally  numerous  with  thofe  that  have  Mif- 
fionaries. Their  number  then,  according  to  the 
Br.  will  be  forty-feven  ;  which,  with  the  three  we 
before  mentioned,  will  make  fiftyi—- In  the  Pro- 
P  vince 

the  above-mentioned  furvey,  which  found  between  twcJ 
and  three  Million  inhabitants  in  the  Colonies  and 
Iflands,  "  the  profeflbrs  of  the  Church  were  about  a 
third  part'\  So  that,  according  to  the  Dr's  own  ac- 
count, no  more  Whites  belong  to  the  Church  thart 
about  one  third  part  of  between  two  and  three  Million, 
after  eight  hundred  and  forty  four  thoufand  Blacks  have 
been  dedu6ted.  And  yet  this  reckoning,  though  it 
takes  ofFfeveral  hundred  thoufands  from  the  Million 
profefTors  of  the  Church,  that  had  been  before  number- 
ed, is  carried  much  too  high,  the  Blacks  not  being  ad- 
mitted into  the  account  5  as  may  b§  feen  in  what  if 
faid  above* 


114    '^h^  Appeal'  to  the  Public  an!  werecJ. 

vince  of  New- York,   there  are  three  Epifcopal 
Churches  that  fubfift  without  help  from  the   So- 
ciety.    The   Miflionaries,    by   the   abftrads,  are 
eleven  ;  and  as  the  Dr.  has  faid  nothing  here    of 
deftitute  Churches,  we  fhall  take  it   for  granted^ 
that  fourteen  is   the  number  of  Epifcopal  Con- 
gregations in  this  Province.—In    the  four  New- 
England   Colonies,     Connecticut,    Rhode-Ifland, 
Maffacufetts,  and  New-Hampfhire,  there  may  be 
three  Epifcopal  Churches  that  are  fupported  within 
themfelves,  though  I  certainly  know  of  no  more  than 
two.     The  Miflionaries,  by  the  Society's  account^ 
are  thirty.     The  members  of  the  Church,  fettled 
here  and  there  in  towns,  where  there  are  no  Mif- 
lionaries, may  pofTibly   make  a  number  equal  to 
fix  or  feven  Congregations  that  are  fupplled  with 
Clergymen.     The  Churches  then,    in   the  New- 
England-Colonies,  will  be  forty.     According  to 
this  computation,  which,  I  am  perfuaded,  exceeds 
the  truth,  there  are,  in  the  feven  Colonies,  extend- 
ing from    Fenfylvania   to    the   utmoft    northern 
bounds  of  the  MafTachufetts-Province,   one   hun- 
dred and  four  Epifcopal  Churches.     Let  it  now 
be  fuppofed,  there  arc  fifty  families  belonging  to 
a  Church   one    with   another  ;  which,  I   believe, 
Epifcopalians  themfelves  will  think  full  allowance. 
Lee  it  alfo  be  fuppofed,  there   are  five  perfons   to 
each  family  ;  which  is  again   large  allowance,   as 
there  are  few  families  in   which  ail  the   members 
go  to  Church  :  In  fome,  not  more  than  one  goes  ; 
in  others,  not  more   than   two  or  three.     The  a- 
mount  then  of  all  thefe  profefTors  of  the  Church  is 
only  twenty  fix  thoufand  -,  a  rheer  handful  in  compa- 
rifon  wiih  more  than  a  rhillion  perfons,  which,  with- 
out difpute,  live  within  thefc  bounds.     And,  if  we 
Ihould  take  in  Nova-Scotia,  in  whichthere  are  more 

of 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered.     1 15 

^f  other  denominations,  than  there  are  of  Epifco- 
palians,  the  number  would  not  rile  to  more  than 
twenty  eight  or  twenty  nine  thoufand.  But  we 
v/ill  allow  thirty  thoufand.  There  is  ftill  wanting 
nine  hundred  and  fevcnty  .  thoufand  to  makeup 
the  Million  of  Epifcopalian  profeflbrs  we  are 
told  of.  And  where  fhall  we  find  thefe  ^  Are 
they  to  be  found  in  the  Colonies  fouthward  of 
Penfylvania  ?  In  all  rhefe,  unlefs  we  reckon  the 
blacks  as  members  of  the  Church  of  England,  we 
fhall  fall  vaflly  fhort  of  the  number  that  is  want- 
ed ;  and  the  fame  muft  be  faid,  fhould  we  take 
in  all  the  whiles  of  all  the  Englifh  Well-India 
Iflands.  It  is  acknowledged,  there  are  more  Epif- 
copalians  in  Virginia  and  Maryland,  than  other 
denominations  ;  but  all  their  while  inhabitants, 
tDgether  with  thofe  of  the  Carolinaes,  and  Georgia, 
even  to  Florida,  will  not  make  one  half  the  num- 
ber that  is  wanting  y  as  might  be  made  to  appear 
by  furveys  that  have  been  taken  of  their  numbers. 
But  if  we  fubllradl  Quakers.  Bapifts,  P.-efoyterians, 
and  Roman-Catholics,  which  are  numerous  efpe- 
cially  in  Maryland,  and  thofe  alfo  who  make  no 
profefiion  at  all,  and  attend  no  public  worfnip  after 
any  mode  whatever,  [and  furely  it  would  be  too 
ihamefal  to  reckon  fuch  as  "  members  of  the 
Church"!  it  is  really  queftionable,  whether  the  a- 
mount  of  Epifcopal  profefTors,  in  all  thefe  Colonies, 
will  be  more  than  about  two  hundred  and  feventy 
thoufand.  So  that,  confining  ourfclves  to  the  A- 
merican  Colonies,  it  cannot,  as  we  judge,  be  fup- 
pofed,  with  any  probability  of  reafon,  that  there 
are  fo  many  as  one  third  part  of  that  Million 
of  "  members  of  the  Church"  the  Dr.  has  reckon- 
ed, not  taking  in  the  blacks  So  widely  diftant  are 
9;]r  apprehenfiogs  from  his,  coacerning  ihis  matter. 


Ii6    The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered. 

Either  the  Gentleman  thar  made  *'a  furvey  of 
the  inhabitants  in  the  Colonies  and  Iflands,  and  adr- 
itribution  of  them  into  their  feveral  ckfTesJn  i  762", 
was  egregicufly  niiftaken,  or  the  Dr.  in  his  account 
frorn  him,  when  he  fay;.  *'  of  the  wbiteSj  the  pro- 
feflbrs  of  the  Church  were  about  a  third  part  ;  the 
Prefbyterjans,  Independents  and  Anabaptifis,  were 
not  fo  many  \  the  Germans  and  other  denomina- 
tions ^mounted  to  more".  There  are  no  indepen-? 
dants  that  I  know  of  in  any  of  the  irovinces. 
ThePrefbyterians  andCongregationifts^are  perhaps 
as  numerous  as  all  the  other  denominations,  Non- 
epifcopal,  put  together  \  and  thefe  only  are  more 
than  double  the  number  of  all  the  Epifcopalian- 
whites  on  the  American  Continent  ;  as  could  de- 
liionftrably  be  made  to  appear,  was  it  worth  while 
%Q  be  a?  xhe  iroubie  of  making  calculations,  and 
^;?^hibiting  the  grounds  on  which  they  are  made. 

Ths  Dr.  to  add  force  to  his  argument  in  favor 
pfthe  nriiffion  of  Bifhcps,  would  bring  in  the  Ne^ 
groes,  '■*  y/ho  have  been  found,  fays  he,  to  be  about 
eighc  hundred  and  forty  four  thouland'*.  His  head 
and  heart  are  fo  filled  with  the  notion  of  an  Epifco- 
pate,  that  he  feems  difpofed  to  imagine  it  the  bed 
^tted  nijean  for  evsry  good  purpo'fe  that  can  be  men- 
tioned. As  he  thought  it  proper  to  take  notice  of 
the  pqor  Negroes,  coujd  he  have  hit  upon  nothing 
but  an  Epifcopate  for  thei^-  relief  I  This,  at  bell,  is 
^  fkr-fetch'd;,  rpund-aboiit  expedient  \  and  would, 
pjobably  he  of  little  fcrvice,  was  it  to  take  effedl. 
Their  forlorn  cafe  ^alls  for  a  more  direft  and  pow° 
erfui  rernedy.  As  '^.  iharera  with  us  in  the  fame 
cornmioa  naturp'\  h^ve  ihey  not  the  fame  natural 
cffcntiai  rights  B  And  are  not  thefe  outragicufly 
\iiv^dled^^  v/hile  they  ^re  held  in  ignoble  flavery  ^. 
'    '   "^  "  ""    '    '■  Are 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered.     117 

Are  they  not  inhumanly  trampled  upon,  while  they 
are  treated  as  though  they  were  nothing  better  than 
fo  many  beads  of  burden  ?  It  is  moft  horribly 
fhameful,  that  fo  many  of  the  human  fpecies,  as 
good  by  natu'-e  as  their  mafters,  and  that  have  as 
good  a  right  to  the  freedom  of  men,  (hould  be 
bought  and  fold  as  though  they  v/ere  cattle  -,  and 
dealt  with  as  though  they  were  an  inferior  order 
to  dogs  !  if,  inftead  of  an  Epifcopate,  for  the  be- 
nefit of  thefe  greateft  of  all  fufferers  in  his  Ma- 
jefly's  dominions,  an  ad  of  Parliament  had  been 
propofed  to  fet  them  all  free,  or  to  prohibit  the 
enflaving  any  more  for  time  to  come,  or  to  reftrain 
the  cruelty  of  the  Planters  in  their  ufuage  of  them, 
it  would  have  been  much  more  to  the  purpofe. 
It  is  a  difhonor  to  Englifhmen,  who  efteem  it  their 
diftinguifhing  glory,  that  they  enjoy  the  fuUeft 
reafonable  liberty,  to  make  slaves,  and  in  the 
mod  abje(fl  fenfe,  of  fuch  amazing  numbers  of  their 
fellow-men,  It  is  an  abomination  highly  worthy 
of  a  Parliamentary  interpofition.  This  would  do 
the  poor  Negroes  infinitely  more  fervice,  than  to 
fettle  an  Epifcopate  over  their  mafters,  who  can- 
not be  fuppofed  to  have  any  tolerable  degree  of 
religion,  while  they  thus  palpably  break  in  upon 
the  moft  evidently  plain  laws  of  righteoufncfs  and 
goodnefs,  to  their  eternal  difgracc  as  reafonable 
moral  agents.  I  have  often  wondered,  nothing 
has  been  done  i,n  the  Colonies  to  put  a  ftop  to  the 
cruelly  unjuft  practice  of  making  (laves  of  the  poor 
Negroes  ;  efpecially,  as  they  have,  for  fome  years, 
been  fighing  out  the  moft  bitter  complaints  againft 
all  tendencies  towards  their  being  enflaved  ihem- 
felves.  Is  tliis  to  a6l  a  confiftent  part  ?  Is  it,  in 
any  equitable  fenfe,  doing  to  others  as  they  would 
pthers  ihould  do  to  them  ? 

The 


1 1 8    The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered. 

The  lad  argument,  -'for  granting  an  Ameri- 
can Epifcop^ce",  is  taken  "  from  the  obligations 
of  gratitude  •,  a  national  fenfe  of  which  ought,  at 
this  time,  to  have  peculiar  efficacy"  :  As,  "  by  a 
fignal  interpofition  of  divine  providence,  the  jBntifh 
arms  in  America  have  triumphed  over  all  that 
oppofed  them,  prodigioufly  extending  our  Colo- 
nies by  new  acquifuions,  and  fecuring  them,  not 
only  by  treaty,  but  by  a  total  annihilation  of  that 
power  on  the  Continent,  whereby  ou.r  former  fafety 
was  chiefly  endangered".  What  fpecial  connedi- 
on  the  vidorious  fucc^fs  of  the  Britiih  arms  in 
America,  under  the  ble0ing  of  providence,  has 
with  the  eftabliiliment  of  an  Epifcopate  here,  is 
not  fo  very  eafie  to  difcern.  It  is  readily  owned, 
*'  every  wife  nation  fees  and  acknowledges  God  in 
fuch  events  :  and  every  religious  nation  will  make 
fome  futable  returns  to  him  for  fuch  extraordinarj'^ 
favors".  And  it  is  hoped,  fome  fuch  returns  have 
been  made.  If  not,  the  nation,  including  the  Co- 
lonies, are  juftly  chargeable  with  great  ingratitude 
to  that  al-wife  righteous  being,  who  turned  the 
late  war  fo  much  m  their  favor.  But,  fays  the  Dr. 
''  the  circumltances  of  things  evidently  point  out 
two  duties  to  our  Governors,  both  of  them  im- 
portant in  themfelves,  and  of  indifpenfible  obliga- 
tion. One  is,  the  further  fcrcurity  and  fupport  of 
the  true  religion  in  America,  in  thofe  places,  where 
it  already  is  ;  and  the  other,  the  propagation  of 
it  in  thofe  places  to  which  it  has  not  hitherto 
been  extended".  By  the  "  farther  fecurity  and 
fupport  of  the  true  religion  in  America",  the 
Dr.  muft  mean,  to  make  his  arguing  pertinent, 
the  providing  for  the  fupport  of  an  Epifco- 
pate, as  a,n  expedient  for  the  lecunty  of  the 
TRUE   RELIGION,  that    is^    ^hc     i^ligion    of  the; 

Church 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered.     1 1 9 

Church  of  England.  Surely,  his  imagination  has 
here  got  the  better  of  his  judgment.  Is  the  reli- 
gion  of  the  Church  of  England  the  only  true  re- 
ligion on  the  American  Continent  ?  Is  religion,  in 
none  of  the  other  forms,  to  be  regarded  ?  Were 
Epifcopalians  the  only  Colonifts  employed,  under 
God,  to  efFed:  the  late  glorious  conquefts  ?  We 
do  not  eileem  it  a  duty,  much  lefs  an  indifpenfible 
one,  in  confequencs  of  thefe  conqueils,  to  provide 
for  the  fecurity  or  fupport  of  the  religion  of  Epif- 
copalians, any  more  than  the  religion  of  other  de- 
nominations of  chriftians  in  the  Colonies.  And  of 
all  denominations,  the  profefTors  of  the  Church 
have  the  lead  to  fay  upon  the  head  of  ''  farther 
fupport",  as  they  are,  in  raoft  of  the  Colonies,  pro- 
vided for  by  the  Society  at  home  at  an  annual  great 
cxpence. —  As  to  the  other  duty,  "  the  propagation 
of  religion,  in  thofe  places  to  which  it  has  not  beea 
extended"  ;  fuch  a  fcnfe  of  it  was  impreflfed  upoa 
the  hearts  of  the  rulers,  miniftcrs  and  Laity,  more 
tfpecially  in  this  Province,  that  proper  meafures 
were  concerted,  and  MifTionaries  adually  fent  to 
the  Mohawk-Country,  to  carry  the  gofpel  to  them  ; 
but  the  whole  defign  was  made  void,  becaufe  it 
was  not  to  be  executed  by  profeiTors  of  theChurch, 
according  to  the  Epifcopalian  mode.  More  may 
be  faid  of  this  hereafter. 

The  Dr.  goes  on,  "  as  America  is  the  region,' 
wherein  the  divide  goodnefs  has  been  more  im- 
mediately difplayed  in  favor  of  the  Britifh  nation  ; 
fo  America  is  evidently  the  very  ground  on  which 
fome  futable  monument  of  gratitude  ought  to  be 
ereded".  And  what  monument  is  this  ?  In  con- 
fiftency  with  the  courfe  of  the  prefent  argument, 
it  mufl:  be   the  eftabliflameat  of  an   Epifcopate. 

How 


^^io    ^T'he  Appeal  to  the  Public  atifwei-ed* 

How  is  this  made  out  ?  After  the  following  man- 
ner, if  at  all  ;  "the  honor  of  God  is  mbildiredly 
promoted  by  public  worfliip — that  \^'or(hip   muft 
be  moft  acceptable   to  him^  wherein  the  adoration 
of  his  creatures  are  regularly  offered   him,   in  the 
folemn  offices  of  the  pureft  and  bed  feligion^ — and 
the  national  religion  muft  be  fuppofed  bell  to  an- 
fwer  thefe  characters  in  the  national  opinion".    It  is 
far  from  being  true,  that  the  religious    adorations 
of  the  Church  of  England  are  the  "  pureft:   and 
bed",  or  that  their    worfhip  is,  on    this  account, 
"  moft  acceptable  to  God'*.     But,  fuppofing  this 
to  be  the  national  opimon,  meaning  hereby,  the  o- 
pinion  of  thofe  in  the  nation,  who  aie  rhembers  of 
the  eftabliflied  Church  •,  what  is  the  confequence 
herefrom  ?  Says  the  Dr.   "it  naturally  follows, 
that  the  ftate  of  the  national  religion  here  [in  the 
Colonies]   has  a  right,  on  this  occafion,  to  the  pe- 
culiar attention  of  thofe,  who  are  entrufted  with 
the  diredion   of   our  public   affairs".     It  needs 
fomeihing  more  than  a  bare  affirmation   to  make 
this  an  undoubted  truth.     The  other  denomina- 
tions think  they  have  as  good  a  right,  as  the  Epif- 
eopalians,  to  the  attention  of  thofe,  who  have   the 
management  of  the  public  affairs  ;  and,  in  many 
of  the  Colonies,  it  is  thought,  they  have,    in  flridb 
juftice,  a  peculiar  right.     But,  let  it  be  fuppofed^ 
that  the  peculiar  right  lies  on  the  fide   of   the 
Church  of  England  ; — what  then  ?  This  Church, 
in  America,  without  a  Bifhop,  "  is  perifhing  foi^ 
want  of  common  neceffaries  •,  fhe  has  been   longf 
imploring  relief  under  fuch  difeafes,  [being  defti- 
tuteofa  Bifhop]  as  muft  pfove  fatal  to  her,    if^ 
much   longer  hegle(5led".     What  is   the    confe- 
quence ?  Her   requeft  mufl   be  anfwered,  as    ar 

SUTABLE    MONUMENT    OF    GRATITUDE     fOF     the 

late 


The  Appeal  to  the  P^^^blic  anfwereA     til 

late  divine  appearances  in  fhyor  of  the  Britifli  arms 
in  ikmerica.  Heaven  and  eiyth  are  called  upon 
tojudge,  whether  this  is  unreasonable  I  This  is  ihe 
Dr's  argument  in  full  force,  fo  far  as  it  has  any; 
Upon  which  I  would  afk,  is  it  incJ^eed  a  truth,  that 
the  Church  of  England,  in  the  Coionies,  '*  is  in  a 
perifning  condition  for  want  of  neceffijries"  ?  Is  it 
a  real  objet:!:  of  faith,  that  "^^  her  difeafes  are  fuch  as 
mud  prove  fatal  to  her",  if  flie  is  much  loi^ger  with- 
out a  BiQiop  ?  Surely,  this  reprefent'icion  of  her 
cafe  mud  be  the  effed:  of  zeal,  not  conducted  by 
knowledge.  And,  had  not  the  Dr  been  under 
the  influence  of  an  undue  warmth  of  fpirit,  he 
would  never  have  though r,  much  lefs  have  pub- 
licly faid,  that  an  American  Episcoi^ate,  for 
the  relief  of  the  Church,  under  her  difeafes  opera- 
ting to  her  fpeedy  ruiri,  v/as  that  special  monu- 
ment OF  gratitude  that  OUght  to  be  ereded 
in  return  for  God's  goodnefs,  difplayed  in  favor  of 
the  Britifh  arms  in  this  part  of  the  world.  1  fcarce 
know  how  to  fpeak  upon  the  matter  ferioufly,  ife 
is  placed  in  fo  ludicrous  a  light.  Notwithftanding 
the  "  difeafed  perifhing"  Hate  of  the  American 
Church,  have  not  praifes  and  adorations,  accord- 
ing to  the  "  pureft  and  beft"  forms  of  devotion,  beea 
offered  up  to  almighty  God,  in  all  the  Epiicopal 
afiemblies  on  the  Continent,  for  the  marvellous 
interpofitions  of  his  providence^  on  our  behalf,  in 
the  late  war  ?  if  this  is  not  the  truth,  they  are 
far  behind  the  other  denorninations  of  chriftians, 
whofe  religious  thankful  adorations  have  publicly 
been  prefented  to  the  divine  majefty  on  this  ac- 
count, in  their  way,  however  fhort  it  rhay  have 
fallen  of  the  "  better  and  more  pure'*  mode  of 
praifing  God  in  pradtice  by  the  Church.  There 
have  alfo  been  national  religious  adorations  for 
Q^  thij 


122     The  Appeal  to^the  Public  anfwereJc 


lis  NATIONAL   merc;y  ^  and,  if  they   proceeded 
3m  truly  thankful  /nearts,   they   arc,  in  the  ac- 


thi 

from 

count  of  the  facred  ^^ooks,  a  futable  expreflion   of 

gratitude.     But  tMe  Church  here  is  ftill  in  want  of 

Bilhops  5  and  t)?iere  is  therefore  ftill    wanting  the 

moft  SUTABLE    MONUMENT    OF    GRATITUDE,    for 

thefe  favors.,  of  heaven.  Grateful  hearts,  and  well- 
ordered  converfations,  may  poflibly  be  as  sutable 
MONUMENTS,  upon  this  occafion,  as  the  fettle- 
ment  of  ar.N  Episcopate.  If  the  Colonifts,  whe- 
ther Epifcopalians,  or  others,  have  nor,  by  this 
goodnefs  of  God,  been  engaged  to  love  him  with 
all  their  hearts,  and  to  ferve  him  with  all  their 
powers,  no  other  return  will  atone  for  the  want  of 
this,  not  excepting  there  being  an  Episcopate 
cftablifhed  here.  This  is  what  God  mainly  ex- 
pedis  •,  with  this  he  will  be  pleafed,  yea,  a  thou- 
iand  times  more  pleafed,  than  with  the  miflion  of  as 
many  Bifhops  as  can  be  defired.  I  appeal  to 
heaven  and  earth  for  the  truth  of  this. 


5^M^^M5^SK^M)^^^)^^M^)^5e(^^)^3^ 


ANSWER 


ANSWER  to  Section  VII.  in  which  the 
Cafe  of  the  American  Heathens  is  particularly 
confidered,  and  faid  to  require  an  Epifcopate. 


«^'«X^^S^'«^*^^^ir<^^S^S^'^^^^p'>^*^^^  •^'^  v^ 


WE  are  as  fully  fenfibie  as  the  Dr.  or  any  of 
the  Epifcopalians,  can  be,  that  it  is  "  the  duty 
of  thofe  whom  the  "day-fpringfrom  on  high"  has 
yifited,  to  communicate  this  light  to  others,  and, 
as  they  have  opportunity,  to  give  the  knowledge  of 
religion  to  thofe  who  are  without  it".  We  think, 
with  him,  that  '^  the  providence  of  God  points  out 
this  general  duty  by  the  late  events,  more  plainly 
and  exprefly  than  ever.  We  never  had  until  this 
time,  fo  favourable  an  oppoitunity  for  carrying  for- 
ward this  blefifed  work  :  We  never  had  it  fo  much  in 
our  power  ;  and  our  obligations  of  gratitude  were 
never  fo  ftrong*'  \  nor  the  arguments  that  may  be 
fetched  from  the  "  principles  of  worldly  policy". 
Thefe,  and  fuch  like,  powerful  motives  have  often 
been  urged  upon  our  people,  both  publicly  and 
privately.  We  do  therefore  moft  cordially  join 
with  the  Dr.  in  every  thing  he  has  faid  to  repre- 
fenc  the  reafonablenefs,  the  indifpenfible  duty  of  a 
pious  concern  for  the  aboriginal-natives  of  America, 
exprefied  in  all  futable  endeavours  to  aquain:  them 
v>'ii:h  *'  the  gofpel  of  the  bledcd  God".  The  differ- 
ence between  us  lies  in  this,  v/e  do  not  think,  that 

d  2  ^I> 


1 24    The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwcred 

an  Epifcopate  in  the  Colonies  is  To  conne(5i:ed  with 
this  duty,  but  that  it  may  very  well  be  performed 
without  one  ;  nor  do  we  believe  that  an  Epifco- 
pate is  peculiarly  pointed  out  by  thofe  events  that 
have  made  the  prelent,  the  molt  convenient  time 
for  extending  the  knowledge  of  the  only  true 
God,  and  his  Son  Jefus  Chn(t,  to  thefe  uttermoll 
parts  of  the  earth.  The  Dr.  is  of  the  contrary 
opinion.  His  principal  aim  indeed,  in  this  fe6tion, 
is*  to  fhevv,  that  our  duty,  in  regard  of  the  Ame- 
rican-Heathen, more  efpecially  in  confideration  of 
the  happy  events  of  the  late  war,  requires  an  E- 
pifcopate.  His  reafonlng  here  takes  in  a  variety 
of  articles.  They  are  comprehended  in  the  fol- 
lowing  iummary,  but  juft,  reprefentation;  "  From 
^'^  repeated  trials,  it  appears,  that  there  muft  be 
^'forne  more  efFedlual  way  for  the  converfion  of 
^'  Savages,  than  has  been  yet  taken.  It  was 
^'  hoped  that  the  converfion  of  Indians  would  na- 
^•^  luraHy  introduce  among  them  civility  of  man- 
^^  ners  ;  butic  feems  now  to  be  generally  agreed, 
*■'  that  what  was  propofed  as  a  confequeiice^  oughe 
^'  to  be  confidered  as  a  necejjary  meafijot  fpreading 
H  ihe  gofpel  among  favage  nations. r^It  having 
^^  then  become  a  fettled  poi^nt,  that  the  dioft  pro- 
*'  per  way  for  converting  Savages,  is  pre-vioufly  to. 
^^  infirucfl  them  in  the  arts  and  manners  of  civil 
**  llfe^  the  Society  has  been,  for:a  confiderablc 
*'>  lime,  enoployed  in  colleding  fuch  intelligence, 
<?' relating  to  this  fubje^,  as  to  enable  them  to 
^'  form  a  proper  plan  for  civilizirig  the  nations   of 

^*  America,  in  order  to  their  being  chriftians.- 

**  But  a  vaFiefy  of  plans  have  been  tranfmitted 
*^  from  this  Country.  The  perfons  who  have  been 
^' confuh^d,  hav-e  their  particular  prejudices  and 
3^  fittachments.     The  things  and  places  which  one 

^.'  reprclqnts 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered.     125 

*'  reprefents  as  expedient,  are  condemned  by  ano- 
^'  then— To  balance  and  adjuft  To  many  different 
*'  reprefencations  would  be  a  work  of  much  time, 
**  and  of  courle  retard  the  execution  of  the  gene- 
"  ral  plan.  A  falfe  ftep  ir^  the  beginning  might 
*'  produce  confequences  that  arc  fatal.  But  thefe 
*'  difficulties  would  vanifli,  in  a  great  meafure,  un- 
•'  der  an  Epifcopate.  In  a  fyftem  of  this  kind, 
*'  where  a  number  of  powers  and  movements  are 
*'  to  be  employed,  to  one  common  purpofe,  a  re- 
"  gular  and  confident  direction  of  them  is  requi- 
*'  fite.-^Upon  the  whole,  a  Bifhop  is  thought  to 
• '  be  the  moll  proper  perfon  to  be  entrufted  with 
"  this  fuper-intending  influence,  one  therefore  mud 
"  be  appointed  and  fen:  in  order  to  a  compli- 
"  ance  with  the  duty,  arifing  from  the  late  vido- 
*'  ries  on  the  American-Continent".  This,  in 
fum,  is  the  Dr's  argument  in  all  it's  parts. 

As  to  the  firft  ;  "  it's  being  generally  agreed, 
that  the  mod  proper  way  for  converting  Savages, 
is  prevjoufly  to  inftrudt  them  in  the  arts  and  man- 
ners of  civil  life";  it  m^y  be  juftly  queftioned, 
whether  It  exhibits  the  truth  of  fad.  I  am  confi- 
dent it  does  not,  if  this  "general  agreement"  js  fup- 
pofed  to  extend  to  the  more  northern  Colonies. 
Vv^e  are  here  pretty  generally  inclined  to  think, 
$hat  the  increafe  of  temptations,  from  the  arts  and 
manners  of  civil  life,  would  rather  be  an  hindrance 
to  their  converfion,  than  a  previoujfly  proper  requi- 
fite  in  order  to  it.  The  Indian-Natives  have  certain- 
ly been  hurt,  not  ferved,  by  being  put  into  the Engr 
liih  way  of  living.  Many  tribes  of  them,  in  the 
Maffachufetts-Province,  have,  by  this  means?  been 
fo  depopulated,  that  th^re  are  now  fcarce  any  re- 
n^fein^of  theni  to  be  feen.     And  I  am  fully  per- 

fuaded. 


126     The  Appeal  to  jhe  Public  anfweredo 

fiiaded,  the  taking  them  ofFfrom  the  way  of  life 
they  have  been  fo  long  accuftomed  to,  and  getting 
them  into  that  which  is  in   life  among  us,    \yould 
be  an  effcdual  merhod  to  put  an  end  to  their  lives 
in  the  world.      Nor  is  there   any  need   of  what   is 
called  civilizing  them,  in  order  to  their  embracing 
Chrillianiry.     Their  being  Savages,  and   living  in 
a  v/ay  different  from  what  we  do,  is  no  reafon  vthy 
their  conv^rfion' may   not  be  expeded,  if  futable 
means  arc  ufed  with  them.     The  dtCign  of  the  re- 
ligion of  Jefiis  is  to  humanife,  as  well  as  chriftianife 
the  foul,   to   meliorate  the  temper,  to  foften    it's 
ronghnefs,  and  of  favage  to   make   it    meek  and 
gentle.     And  this  will  be  it's  effedi,  in  whomfoever 
k  is  really  planted  ;  and,  wiihour  fueh  implantation, 
men  may  be  lavage,  notwiihfianding  the  arts  and 
manners  of  civil  life  ;    infiar.ces  of  which  are  too 
common,  even  in   the   mod  civilifed   nations.     It 
may  be  wore hy  of  notice  here,   the  Canadians  ne- 
ver made.ic  any  pare  of  their  care  to  change    the 
Indian's  m^de   of  civil   life  •,  arid  ycr,  rhey  found 
way s  to  atl a c h  n'li m c r o u s   1 1  i b e s  o f  t h ' m  i o  ft rm ly 
to  the  religion  of  Rome,  that  it  is  a  vain    thing  to 
try'to  brmg  ihcm  to  a  better  fenle  of  things.      And 
why  m-^Y  hot  wc,  in  like  m'ahneri^lmplant  the  reji^- 
gion  of  the  crp-pA  in  the  n":inds  of  t'l?<fj?ie,  who  h'ave 
not  been  as  )-ti  in(lo61:rinar(:d  in    the    principles  of 
Popery?   Should  we  expend  a^  much  zeafand  pains 
to  make  them  eood  ChriRians,  as  the  French  hav^ 
done  to  make  them  good  Catholics  sve  Illould,   I 
doubt  net,  (oon  lee  the  happy  fruits  of  it  ;  though 
no  care   (hould  be  takt  n  to  bring   thtm  into  our 
way  of  civil  life. 

The  next  link  in  the  chain  of  reafoning  is,  *'  fhe 
Society's  having,   after  gi-eat  pains   in  collecting: 

information?)  S3 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfvvered.      127 

informations,  formed  a  plan  to  civl^ife  the  Indian- 
Nations,  in  order  to  the  making  them  Chriilians". 
One  would  not  have   expelled   to  have  feen   the 
Society  brought  in  here,  as  To  tflential  a  part  of 
the  argument.     For  it   is   affirmed,  a  few   pages, 
back^  "  if  we  examine  it's  Charter,  we  diall  tind  ic 
as  evident  as  language  can  make  it,  that   the  fup- 
port  and  propagation  of  the  gofpei  among   our 
OWN  PEOPLE    IN  America,  was  the    immediate 
and  principal  defign  of  their   incorporation.     Ti^e 
converfion  of  the  heathen   was  not  their  primary 
and  immediate  objed".     This  is  faid  to  {htW,  that 
the  Society  has  been  "  abufed",  when  fpoken  of  as 
expending  their  charity  in  the  Englifh  Colonies,  to 
the  too  great  negledt  of  the  Indian-Heathen.    And 
thofe  who  have  been  thus  "  abufive  to  the  Soci- 
ety" are  charged    with    the  guilt   of  "  petulent 
tongues",  or  *'  pens".     But  now  an  Epifcopate  is  in 
view,  ic  is  their  proper  work,  and  in  diitinftion 
from  all  others,  to  difcharge   the  duty  of  fending 
the  gofpei  to  the  American-infidel  Natives.     The 
writers  on  the  Epifcopalian  fide  have   the  advan- 
tage beyond  all  others.     They  can   make   ufe  of 
the  fame  argument,  with  a  good  grace,  to  contrary 
purpofes.     When  the  Church  is  to  be  increafed  in 
the  Colonies,  the  Society  perfectly  fall  in  with  the 
great  defign  of  their  inftitution,  while  they  lay  out 
fo  much  of  their  money  to  ferve  this   end,   that 
they  have  little  left  to  chriftianife  the  Indians ;  buc 
when  a  Biihop  is  wanted,  and  chriftianifing  the  In- 
dians can  be  ufed  as  an  argument  for  his  miHion, 
it  at  once  becomes  the  great  work  of  this  Society  ; 
and  they,  in  diftindion  from  all  others,  mult  en- 
gage in   it  as   their   inviolable  duty.     And  I  will 
fuppofe  ic  to  be  their  bufinefs,  fori  really  believe  in 
is,  and  in  virtue  of  their  Charter,  however  inatten- 
tive 


128    The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwefed* 

tive  they  may  have  been  to  this  part  of  the  trufl 
that  has  been  commuted  to  them.  And  what 
follows  herefrom  ?  The  argument  goes  on. 

*•  There  are  fo  many   plans  and  propbfals,  fd 
many  different  opinions   in  different   perfons,  and 
fach  a  number  of  difficulties  arifing,  iri  regard  of" 
this  work  of  chriftianifing  the  Indians,  that  there  is  • 
a  neceffity  for  one  fupelr-intending  diredtion  ;  and 
who  fo  proper  for  this  as  a  Bifhop  ?    Sir  William 
Johnfon's  experience  in,  and  careful  attention  to^ 
'Ind'an-affairs,   rtjay  make   him  the  beft  qualified 
perfon  for  a  Political  fuper-intendant  •,  but,  as  the 
great  end  in  view  is  the  advancement   and  propa- 
gation of  the  chriftian  religion,  there  mult  evi- 
dently appear  a  peculiar  propriety  in  carrying  on 
the  work  under   the  diredion  of  a  Bifliop".     To 
all  which  the  anfwer  is.  If  a  BiHiop  was  now  refi- 
dent  in  the  Colonies,  it  is  queflionable  whether  it 
would  be  fit  to  entruff  him  v/ith  this  fuper- intend- 
ing power.     He  might,  as  he  ought  to,  be  better 
qualified  for  this  office  than  any  other  Clergy-man  ; 
but  a  Blffiop  cannot  do  every  thing.     If  the  care  of 
all    the  Epifcopal- Clergy  is  committed  to  him, 
this,  one  would  think,  is,  in  all  reafon,  full  work 
enough  for  him,  if  not  a  great  deal  too  much.     He 
-would  not  find  it  an  eafie  matter  to  perform  it  with 
fidelity.     This    fuper- intending     bufinefs     might 
therefore,  to  better  purpofe,  be    put   into  other 
hands.     The  Society  in  Scotland,  for  the  propaga- 
tion of  chriftian  knowledge,  appoint  Commiffion- 
ers,  and  from  the  Laity  as  well  as.  Clergy,  to  con- 
dudl  and  manage  their  affairs,  when  at  a  diftance, 
and  not  within  reach  of  their  own  immediate   in-^ 
fpedion.     The  honorable  Company  for  the  pro- 
pagation of  the  gofpel  in  New-Englandp  and  placed 

adjacent 


The  Appeal  to  the  I^ublic  anrwered.     12^ 

a'djacent  in  America,  have,  froth  the  beginning  of 
their  incorporation,  adled  ilpoh  the  fame  plan,  and 
thoufands  of  the  poor  Indians,  in  execution  of  it^ 
have  been  chriftianifed.  They  have,  at  this  day, 
v/uhin  the  Malfachufetts- Province,  under  the  fu- 
per-intcnding  dirt6^ion  of  their  Commiflloners,  fix* 
teen  Clefgy-men,  Englifh  and  Indian,  ftatedly 
labouring,  either  as  Pallors  of  fo  many  Indian- 
Churches,  or  as  Preachers  to  afifemblies  of  Indians 
that  meet  together  for  divine  worfhip  ;  nine 
Enghfn  Ledlurers,  and  feven  Rated  SchooUmafters, 
befides  occafional  ones.  They  have  likewife  d 
Mifiionary  in  the  Mchawk  Country,  and  an  In- 
terpreter who  has  been  fupported  at  Ohonoquague 
from  a  boy  on  purpofe  to  learn  their  language^ 
which  he  can  now  fpeak  with  as  much  freedom  -as 
any  of  the  Indians,  and  with  vaftly  more  propriety. 
This  young  man  i?  alfo  a  School-mailer  to  the  chil- 
dren in  that  Indian  town.  It  may  be  feared,  the 
other  Society  in  England  vvill  never  accompliih  any 
great  things,  unlefs  upon  a  plan  of  ^  like  nature. 
It  is  heartily  wiflied  this  Society  Would,  in  good 
earned,  engage  in  the  aftait  of  Gofpelifing  the 
Indians,  and  that  they  v/ould  be  thorow  in  it,  not: 
merely  to  promote  a  parry-lntereft,  or  to  favor  the 
defign  of  letiiing  an  Epifcopate  here  ;  but  purely 
to  extend  the  knowledge  of  the  way  to  falvation 
though  Jefus  Chrift,  the  only  Savior  of  men.  It 
may  be  feared,  whether,  in  what  is  propofed  to 
be  done  by  the  Society,  a  regard  to  the  Church, 
as  eflabliflied  in  England,  may  not  be  too  much 
mingled  with  the  common  caufe  of  Chriftianity. 

I  SHALL  not  think  it  impertinent  to  add    herp^. 

^'  as   America  is  the  region  wherein    the  divine 

R  good  ne  Iff 


i^o     The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwcred. 

goodnefs  has  been  more  remarkably  difplayed  in 
favor  of  the  Britifli  Nation"  -,  fo  Americans  are 
the  proper  perfons  id  ered  "  ibme  iutable  mo- 
nument of  religious  gratitude"  on  this  account. 
And  what  more  futable  one,  than  a  vifible  per- 
petually (landing  teftimony  of  their  pions  con- 
cern, and  earned  care,  to  fpread  the  knowledge  of 
that  only  Lord  who  has  done  fuch  great  things 
for  them  ?  The  Non-epifcopal  Clergy  and  Laity, 
in  the  MaiTachufetts-Province,  were  fo  filled  with 
a  fenfe  of  the  peculiar  fitnefs  of  exprefiing  their 
gratitude  to  heaven  in  this  way,  that  they  volun- 
tarily and  liberally  contributed,  upon  the  conclu- 
fion  of  the  lare  war,  towards  the  immediate  fup- 
port  of  twoMifTionaries  in  the  MoHAWK-Country  ; 
who  were  accordingly  fent,  and  lo  far  fucceeded 
in  their  labors,  that  the  Indians  defired  to  have 
a  Church  gathered,  and  to  h^ve  the  facrament 
of  the  Lord's  fupper  adminiftred  to  them.  And^ 
upon  difcourfing  with  them  with  this  view,  it  was 
found  that  a  number  of  them,  were  well  indoctri- 
nated in  the  elTential  principles  of  Chriflianity^ 
and  had  upon  their  minds  an  uniform  pradlicai 
fenfe  of  religion.  A  fchool  alfo  was  fet  up  for 
the  inilrudion  of  the^r  children.  But,  befides 
this  provifion  for  the  prefenr,  they  were  zealoufiy 
defirous  of  having  a  perpetually  continuing  one. 
In  order  to  this,  two  thculand  pounds  fterling 
were  fubfcribed,  in  a  week,  in  the  town  of  Bofton, 
upon  condition  there  might  be  an  incorporated 
Society  among  our  felves  for  the  conducing  and 
managing  this  important  affair.  An  incorpora- 
ting a6l  was  prepared,  and  pafled  by  the  feveral 
branches  of  the  Government  here,  and  fent  home 
fur  the   Royal  fandion,   without  which  ic  could 

not 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anlwered.     131 

not  continue  in  force.  But  it  foon  met  with  a 
Ivlegative,  by  which  means  this  whole  money  was 
loft,  and  as  much  more  we  had  good  realon  to 
cxpeifl  would  foon  have  been  fubicribcd,  befides 
'the  income  of  many  hundred  poun(;is  fteriing  that 
had  been  devoted  to  the  fervice  of  the  Indians. 
The  Public  will  judge,  v/hether  it  was  not  hard, 
feverely  hard,  to  be  reftrained  from  making  ufe 
pf  our  own  money  in  carrying  on  fo  good  a  work 
as  that  of  chi  ifiianifing  the  Indians  •,  efpecially,  as 
it  was  intended  as  a  "  monum.ent  of  gratitude"  to 
heaven  for  thv;  marvellous  .difplay  of  it's  good- 
nefs  to  us  in  ihe  lace  war.  We  eftcemed  this 
hardfhip  the  greater,  as,  but  a  'few  years  before, 
an  incorporating  adt  was  confirmed  at  home, 
though  upon  a  good  delign,  yet  upon  a  far  lefs 
important  one.  And  we  fhould  efteem.  the  hard- 
fhip much  greater  dill,  if,  in  any  meafure,  it  was 
brought  upon  us  by  Episcopal  influence.  I 
Will  not  too  poITtively  fay  that  it  was  ;  but  this  I 
will  fay,  and  in  the  words  of  a  letter  from  home, 
wroce  by  a  Gentleman  that  well  underftood  what 
he  was  about  ;  ''  There  is  reafon  to  think,  that 
"  an  account  of  your  proceedings  [relative  to  ihe 
*'  incorporating  a6t]   was  fent   to  Lambeth,   as 

'^  early  as  to .     The  A — h-B — p  was   pre- 

*' judiced  with  a  notion,  that  the  Society  had  re- 
'*  fufed  to  admit  the  Epifcopalians  at  Bofton  to 
"  fubfcribe  to  the  undertaking.  [This  was  an 
*'  abfoluce  falfehood.]  The  umbrage,  taken  at 
"  thii  new  Soci^^cy  was  fuch,  that  any  the  leaft 
''  attempt  to  take  fubfcriptions  here  would  have 
"  blown  up  the  fufpicions  of  the  Church,  and. 
"  of  the  Society  for  propagating  the  Gos- 
'^  PEL,  into  an  open  flame  againft  it.  What  rouJd 
R  2  ''  be 


'i^z    The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwereip, 

f  be  done  at  the  board  of  trade — has  labored  tp 
^'  do — But  it  Toon  appeared  to  be  a  defperate 
*'  caufe".  We  have  had  other  accounts  to  the 
like  purpofe  ;  and  have  no  reafon  to  think,  they 
^re  ill-grounded  ;  But  whether  they  are,  or  are 
not,  it  is  put  out  of  our  power  to  ere6l  as  "  pro^ 
per  a  monument  of  gratitude  to  heaven"  as  would 
be  done,  fhould  there  be  the  fettlement  even  of  aa 
Epifcqpate, 


^^)^l<^)^)^^):s5s(jsC}s(^?^^)^MM^M^3^M^3^ 


ANSWER 


^^5^^^)3(MMi^)^)3;^5s{^MMM^i?^M3s(5S^)^|^ 


ANSWER  to  Section  VIII.  in  which  the 
Plan,  on  v/hich  alone  American  Bifhops  have 
been  requefted,  is  fairly  dated,  with  Expoftula- 
;ions  on  the  Reafonablenefs  thereof. 


W^  ^^'^'^'^'^'^^^'-y'^^^^'y^'^^^'^''^ 


THE  repetitions,  with  which  the  Dr.  begins 
this  fedtion,  and  in  confequence  of  which  he 
hopes  for  the  attention  of  his  fuperiors,  and  the 
fettlement  of  an  American-Epifcopate,  have  been 
already  confidered.  One  thing  he  has  menti- 
oned, previous  to  his  introducing  the  plan  upon 
this  head,  it  may  not  be  amifs  to  take  fome  notice 
of.  It  is  In  thefe  words,  *'  Will  not  the  complaints 
*'  of  near  a  million  of  Britifn  fubjeds  in  America, 
^' of  unimpeached  loyalty  and  fidelity,  who  are 
*'  fuffering  under  the  mod  unprecedented  hard- 
*'  fhips  with  regard  to  religion,  an  intereft  dearer 
^>  than  property,  and  more  inviolable  than  civil 
^'  liberty,  be  regarded,  and  procure  the  redrefs  of 
^'  fo  intolerable  a  grievance"  ?  He  had  before  faid, 
pag,  45.  that  "  the  Church  of  England  in  Ame» 
rica  contains  near  a  million  of  members"  ;  and  re- 
peated it  again,  pag.  8 1  j  *  though  there  is  no 

reafoa 

'f  About  the  time  of  writing  the  above,  there  appeared  in. 
^  One  of  our  Public  papers,  a  Copy  of  the  Petition  that 

ws§  f^m?  \>y  s  nymb^r  Qf  the  Epifcopal- Clergy,  to  the 

univcrfity 


134     "^'^^  Appeal  to  the  Public  anlvvered. 

reafon  to  think,  as  has  been  before  obferved,  there 
IS  one  third  pan  of  this  number  on  the  American- 
Continent,  and  not  fo  much  as  a  thirtieth  in  all  the 
Colonies  to  the  northward  of  Maryland,  which  are 
much  the  mofl  populous,  and  bid  fair  to  be  flill 
more  fo,  as  they  increafe  with  much  the,  greateft 
rapidity.  We  are  now  told  of  the  "  complaints 
of  this  nearly  a  million  of  Britifli  lubjedls''.  If 
they  have  complained,  their  complaints  have  been 
kept  fecret  in  their  own  breads,  and  not  divulged 

to 

univerfity  of  Cambridge ;  which,  as  it  agreed  with  other 
copies  that  had  been  feen,  and  contained  nothing  in  it 
that  has  been  excepted  againft,  may  be  looked  upon  as 
genuine.  And,  in  this  view  of  it,  i  would  obferve,  that 
*'  the  people  belonging  to  the  Church  of  England,  in 
America",  are  faid  ''  to  be  more  than  a  million".  This 
differs  from  the  Dr's  account,  which  is,  "  near  a  mil- 
lion". But  inftead  of  charging  thefe  accounts  with 
inconfiftency,  i  would  rather  f«iy,  they  may  both  be 
equally  true  ;  the  number  may  be  "  near  a  million'',  or 
*'  more  than  a  million",  j  uft  as  the  Epifcopalians  picafe, 
if  the  Negroe-Slaves  are  reckoned  ;  for,  as  the  Dr. 
has  told  us,  "  they  were  found,  in  the  furvey  that  was 
made,  in  I/62,  to  be  eight  hundred  and  forty  four 
thoufand".  So  that,  by  only  greatning  or  kiienmg  the 
number  of  thefe  Negroes,  the  *'  members  of  the 
Church"  will  be  eitner  '*  near",  or  quite,  or  ''more  than 
a  million"  ;  though,  if  they  are  nut  reckoned,  [and  it 
would  be  to  an  high  degree  fnameful  to  attempt  to 
reckon  them]  the  nymber  of  Epifcopalians  will  be  at 
once  decreafed  many  hundred  thoufands. — It  is  farther 
faid,  in  the  next  paragraph,  '^  the  extent  of  inhabited 
Country  which  hath  hithcito,  with  refpe6t  to  Epifco- 
pacy,  been  neglecRied,  is  forne  thoufands  of  miles". 
Has  not  this  declaration,  fimply  as  it  {lands,  a  tendency 
to  lead  {lranger5  into  a  wrong  conception  of  the  inha- 
bitants of  this  extent,  as  to  their  religious  denominati- 
on ?  It  is  indeed  true,  that  this  "  extent  is  fome  thc5u-^ 


The  Appeal  to  thePublic  anfwered.     135 

to  the  world.  So  far  as  we  may  judge  by  the 
PETiTtOf^s  that  have  been  fent  home,  the  Epifco- 
pal-Clergy  onlv  are  the  complainers.  Thev  are 
certainly  the  only  perlons,  we  ha.e  heard  of;  who 
have  made  any  ftir  about  the  want  of  Bifhops  , 
and  had  not  they  difcovered  a  reftlefs  frame  of  mind 
upon  this  account,  no  body  elfe  would  :  Nor  fo 
^ar  as  I  can  learn,  are  there  any  confiderable  niim-. 
bers,  to  wnom  they  have  been  able  to   propa->ate 

tr^i'tf  °^/P'''''-  ^^"'^  of  themoifre! 
fpeftable  Ep:fcopal.ans,  m  thefe  parts,  for  fobriety. 
good  fenfe,  and  a  fteady  attachment  to  the  intereff 
of  tne  Churcn  of  England,  have  declared  it  to  be 
their  opinion,  that  Bilhops  would  be  of  no  fervice 
here,  and  thatthey  did  not'  defire  they  fhould  be 
lent.  And  it  is  to  me;  as  well  as  to  many  I  have 
converfed  with  upon  this  head,  Epifcopalians  a- 
mong  others  very  queftionable,  whether,  if  the 
members  of  the  Church  of  England,  in  thefe  north- 


ern 


fands  of  mil«'\;  but  it  is  as  true,  as  to  it's  one  half, 
that  not  a  thirtietn  part  of  the  inhabitants  are  Epifco- 
pahans;  and,  as  to  the  other  half,  that  their  number 
will  be  vaftly  leff.ned,  whe„  a  deduftion  has  been  made 
as  It  ou.ht  to  be,  of  the  other  denominations,  together 
wi  h  thofe  who  profefs  no  religion,  and  are  equally  in- 
ditterent  to  every  mode  in  which  it  is  exercifed!  It 
would  have  been  but  fair,  if  fome  hint,  at  leaff,  of  this 
kind  had  been  fuggefted.  As  the  paffage  now  ftands, 
tnole,  to  wnom  the  petition  was  fent,  would  naturallv 
be  led  to  thmic,  that  the  inhabitants,  through  this 
large  extent,  were  moftly,  if  not  wholly,  profcflbrs  of 
the  Church  of  England  :  Though  the  Petitioners 
trtemfelves  knew,  if  they  had  entertained  this  idea  of 
theni.  It  would  not,  in  any  tolerable  degree,  have  con- 
lilted  w,£h  truth.  It  may,  1  believe,  be  juftiv  faid,  if 
tnere  had  betn  more  fnipiicitv,  afid  iels  art,  in  the 
wording  this  petition,  it  would  not  have  been  fo  ex- 
<:eptionable  as  it  now  is. 


%%6    The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwefed* 

ern  Colonies,  were  to  give  in  their  votes,  and  id 
do  it  v/ithout  previous  Clerical  influence,  they 
Would  be  found  to  be  on  the  fide  of  an  American- 
Epifcopate.— As  to  the  "  mod  unprecedented 
hardihips,  and  intolerable  grievances"  this  '*  million 
of  Britilh  fubjeds  are  fuftcring  vvirh  regard  to  re- 
ligion", they  are^  as  we  have  fcen,  nothing  more 
than  thefe  •, — that  they  are  not  favored  with  the 
enjoyment  of  that  '*  difcipline,  the  redoration  of 
which  cannot  rationally  be  attempted  by  thofe 
in  authority",  and  which,  if  '*"  much  reverenced 
by  any,  they  v/ould  be  efteemed  wrong-headed, 
or  MEAN-spiRiTED,  ot  both"  t  That  though  or- 
dination cannot  be  obtained  without  going  to  Eng- 
land for  it  •,  yet  that  they  have  good  friends  there, 
who  will  lighten,if  not  totally  take  ofF,this  burden, 
by  bearing  themlelves  the  expence  arifing  there- 
from :  And,infine,that  they  put  theSocicty  at  home' 
at  a  vaft  expence  of  charity,  without  which  theEpif- 
copal  Churches,  in  many  of  the  Colonies,  would  be 
in  danger  of  foon  dropping  into  Non-exiflence. 
And  notwithllanding  this  gfoundlefs  clamor  of 
*'  unfufferabie  hardfhips,  and  intolerable  griev- 
ance", the  Church  of  England  in  America  has  had 
more  and  greater  favors  bcftowed  on  it,  than  any 
other  denomination  of  chriftians  [»ere  ;  yea,  than 
all  of  them  put  together  :  And  it  may  alfo,  1  be- 
lieve, with  ftrift  truth,  be  affifmed,  that  no  reli- 
gious profeiTors,  in  any  Colonies  on  the  face  of 
the  earth,  have  been  fo  kindly  and  charitably 
encouraged,  helped,  and,  I  may  fay,  upheld  in 
being. 

1  NOW  proceed  to  take  into  confideration  the 
P6.0P0SED  PLAN  for  an  American-Epifcopate.  I: 
is  as  follows. 

«^  That 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfvvered,     137 

"  That  the  Bifliops  to  be  fent  to  America  fhaU 
<■'  have  no  authority,  bur  pj;  eiy  of  a  fpiritnal  and 
*'  Ecclefialtical  nature,  fuch  as  is  derived  altogether 
*'  froni  the  Crturch,  and  not  frotn  the  date — Thac 
"•'  this  authority  (hall  operate  only  upon  rhe  Clergy 
"  of  rhe  Church,  and  not  upon  the  Lauy,  nor 
''  Diffencers  of  any  denominations — That  the  Bi- 
'•'  fliops  (liall  not  interfere  with  the  property,  or 
*•'  privileges,  whether  civil  or  religious,  uf  Church- 
"  men  or  DiiTenters — That,  in  particular,  they 
*'  (hall  have  no  concern  with  the  Probate  of  Wills, 
"  letters  of  Gaardian-fliip  and  Adrniniilration,  or 
*'  Marriage- licences^  nor  be  judges  in  any  cafes 
^'  relating  thereto — But,  that  they  fhall  only  ex- 
>*'  ercife  the  original  powers  of  their  offices,  as  be- 
*'  fore  fl:a':ed,  i  e.  ordain  and  govern. the  Clergy,^ 
*'  and  adminifter  confirmation  to  thofe  who  fhall 
"  defire  it'*. 

Before  I  come  to  the  obje^lions  we  have  to 
make  to  this  plan,  I  would  previoufly  interpofe 
cne  thing,  weighty  in  itfelf,  and  of  Ipecial  im° 
portance  to  thofe,  who  have  been  employed  ia 
contriving,  and  opening,  it  to  the  world,  h  is  this. 
They  have  given  no  evidence,  that  they  v/ere  au- 
thorifed  to  this  bufinefs  ;  and,  in  meddling  with 
what  they  were  not  duly  called  to,  they  have  acted 
in  direft  violation  of  as  exprefs  an  article  as  any  in 
the  eftablifhed  orders  of  the  Church  of  England* 
Let  it  be  obferved  here. 

The  Dr.  introduces  this  plan  with  faying,  "  ic 
has  long  been  fettled  by  our  friends  and  fuperiors 
at  home,  and  the  Clergy  of  this  Country  have  often 
fignified  their  intire  approbation  and  acquiefcence 
therein'*.  And  again,  when  he  had  wrote  the  plan 
$  for 


138    The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwerec?. 

for  publication,  he  adds,  "  this,  without  any  refer- 
vation  or  equivocation,  is  the  exadt   plan  of  art 
American   Epifcopate,  which   has   been  fettled  at 
home".     It  is  truly  extraordinary,  that  Epifcopa- 
lians  fhould  tell  us  of  a  Scheme  for  the  miffion  of 
Bifhops  to  the  Colonies  fettled  at  home,  and  ap- 
probated by  the  Clergy  of  the  Church  of  England 
here,  to  the  intire  neg!e6t  of  his  Majesty,  th6 
acknowledged  supreme  head  of  their  Church, 
without  whom  there  can  be  not  only  nofettlement 
of  a  plan,  refering  to  any  Ecclefiaftical  affair  what- 
ever ;  but  no  authority  fo  much  as   to  attempt 
to  form  one.     It  is  juftly  prefumed,  if  his  Majefiy 
had  been  in  view,  when   it  was  faid   of  this    plan; 
"  that  it  has  long  been  fettled  by  our  friends  and 
fuperiors  at  home",  the  manner  of  didion   would 
have  been  more  exprelTive  of  dutiful  reverence  and 
fubjedlion  ;  a:  leaft,  fome  intimation  would  h^vd 
been  given  of  the  Rojtal   licence  to  &tt  in   this 
tnatter.     But,  inftead  of  this,  a  plan  is  mentioned, 
and  publilhed  to  the  world  as  a  fttrled  one,  with- 
out fo  much  as  an  hint   of  any   communicated 
AUTHORITY  from  his  Majesty  to  this  purpofe  ; 
which  is  really  ftrange,  efpecially  if  confidered  as 
done  by  thofe  who  may  reafoiabiy  be  fuppofedto  be 
Well  acquainted  with  the  conilitution  of  their  own 
Church,  and  the  vaft  extent  of  the  K^ing's  fupre- 
macy  over  it.     Even   the  Convocation,    when 
convened  by  the  King's  writ,  have  no  authority  to 
fettle  any  plan  without  his  confenr,   nor  indetd  {q 
much  as  to  attevipt  to  form  one  without   his 
LictvNCE.      In  the  year,  1702,    the  upper  houfe 
refufed  ro  adl  upon  a  declaration  lent  to  them  from 
the  lower  houfc,   for  this  reafon  in  fpecial,  '*  that 
without  a  Royal  Licence,  they  had  no  authority 
to   ATTtiiiPT,  cnad,  PROMULGEj  or  execute  any 

Ganon^ 


yhe  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered.     139 

Canon,  by  whatever  name  it  might  be  called,  which 
ihould  concern  either  dodtrine  or  difcipline".  * 
And  yet,  a  plan  has  been  privaetly  formed  "  by 
fome  friends  and  fuperiors  at  home",  and  "  ap- 
probated by  the  Epifcopai  Clergy  here",  and  in 
CONVENED  BODIES  for  the  purpofe  •,  which  plan 
is  now  pubiifhed  to  the  world,  and  objedors  in- 
vited to  propofe  their  objedtions,  if  they  have  any, 
to  be  tryed  at  the  tribunal  of  the  Public.  Is  this 
manner  of  condud,  ia  any  degree^  conformabk  to 
the  conftituted  order  of  the  Church  of  Kngland  I 
Dare  Bifhops,  or  even  Arch>Biihops,  at  home, 
venture  upon  a  method  of  a6ling  (o  repugnant  to 
t;hat  SUPREMACY  in  ail Ecckfiaftical  matters,  with 
which,  by  repeated  ads  of  Parliament,  the  Crowm 
has  been  veiled  ?  It  cannot  eafily  be  accounted 
for,  that  It  fhould  be  ventured  upon  in  the  Colo- 
nies. Surely,  a  Plan  for  an  Epifcopare  thus  form-' 
ed,  fettled  and  publifhed,  ought  to  have  no  great 
regard  paid  to  it.  Whatever  "  fuperiors  at  home*' 
S  2  may 

^  Calamy's  abridgement,  vol.  I.  pag.  639.  This  refufal  of 
the  upper  houre,for  the  given  rearon,perfc<fi:ly  agrees, with 
what  was  enacted  by  the  ftatute,  25th  Henry  8.  called  the 
ad  of  fubaiiflion,  decreeing  i.  That  the  convocation 
{hould,from  thenceforth,  be  aflembled  only  by  the  Kir.g's 
writ,  2.  Fhat  it  fhould  make  no  Canons  or  conftitutions, 
but  by  thtKings  licence^  firft  given  thi^m  (o  to.  do,  3.T'hat 
having  agreed  on  any  Canons_  or  ccnftitutlons,  they 
fhould  neither  publish,  nor  execute  them,  without 
the  Kings  confirmation.  Nor  4.  By  his  authc^rity,  ex- 
ecute any  buc  with  certain  limitatioi.s. — Wake's  appeal, 
&c.  pag.  4.  as  cited  by  the  diflenting  Gentltman,  pag.' 
315  [.  Vid.  alfo  Burn's  Ecclefiaftical  law,  under  the  word, 
convocation  ;  where  thefe  particulars  are  mentioned 
as  the  purport  of  this  ftatute,  in  the  opinion  of  two 
chief  Juftices,  and  divers  other  Juftices,  at  a  Commit;- 
tee  before  the  Lords  in  Pariiament. 


'140    The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered 

inay  have  had  an  hand  in  contriving  and  fettling 
this  plan,  whether  they  were  Bifhops,  or  Arch- 
Bifhops,  and  how  *'  often  foever"  it  may  have  been 
*'  approbated  by  the  Epiicopal- Clergy  in  this 
Country",  it  is,  in  reality,  nothing  more  than  their 
privae  fentiments  concerning  the  matter  -,  and  to 
publifn  thefe  as  *'  a  fettled  approbated  Flan"  muft 
appear,  to  all  capable  judges,  an  inflance  of  no 
fmall  prefuniption  :  Efpecially,  if  it  be  remem- 
bered, that  this  is  done  in  diredt  violation  of  an 
exprefs  Canon  of  the  Church  of  England,  guarded 
with  a  very  heavy  penalty;  which  the  Dr.  and 
thofe  who  put  him  upon  publilhing  this  plan,  may 
do  well  to  confider.  The  Canon,  I  have  in  vieWs 
^s  the  LXXlild,  which  ordains  and  con{litutes„ 
*:'  that  no  Friefts,'  or  minifters  of  God's,  word;,  nor 
*^.  any  other  perfons,  iball  meet  together  in  any 
*'  private  houfe,  or  elfe where,  to  confult  upon  any 
^^  matter  or  cpurfe  to  be  taken  by  thetn,  or  upon 
*:^,  their  motion,  or  dire(5lion  by  any  others,  which 
"*'  may  any  way  tend  to  the.  mipeaching,.  or  de- 
\^  praving  of  the  dodrine  of  the  Church 'of  Eng- 
{'  Und,  or  of  the  book  of  common  prayer,  or  of 
*^'  any  part  of  the  gover^iTient  or  difciphne  now  e- 
<^'  fta'blifhed  in  the  Church  of  England,  under  pain 
*'  of  excommunication,  ipfo  faclo'y  ..-It  will  net  be 
difputed,  that  there  has  bten  *' the  meeting  to- 
ges;iier"  of  fome  of  the  Epifcopal- Clergy,  fuperior 
or  inferior,  or  both,  at  home,  or  in  this  Country, 
V  in  priviite  houfes,  or  eilevyhere,  to  confult  upon^ 
a  courfe",  yea^  to  form  a  Plan,  for  altering  the 
*•'  government'  ^nd  difcipline  of  the  Church  of 
Enghni- in  the  Colonies  i  which,  in  true  mean^' 
ing,'and  reality  of  conilrudion,  is  a  pradical  "  im- 
peachment** of  i(  ',  and  greatly  aggravated,  as  this 
plan,  ^hus  privately  formed,  has  been  pubiifhed  to 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered     141 

fhe  world  for  them  to  judge  of  it's  reafonablenefs. 
The  fad  itfelf  is  too  flagrant  to  need  any  proof  5 
and  we  (hall  have  occafion,  by  and  by,  to  fhew, 
that  the  planned  and  publifhed  alteration  essen- 
tially brealvs  in  upon  the  confticuted  government 
and  dsfciphne  of  the  Church  of  England.  How 
the  framers  and  publifhers  of  the  fcheme  for  this 
alteration  can  reconcile  their  condu6l  with  the  a- 
bove-cited  Canon,  they  are  bed  able  to  fay.  In 
the  mean  tirqe  it  behoves  rhem  to  think,  whether, 
by  th«  conftitution  of  their  own  Church,  they  are 
not  efteemed  excommunicated  perfons. 

I  MIGHT  now  be  reafonably  excufed  from  tak- 
ing any  further  notice  of  this  Plan,  as  it  is,  not 
only  deftitute  of  ^U  authority,  but  comes  handed 
to  confideration  in  evident  conrradidion  to  it. 
However,  1  will  go  on,  and  dirtindtly  mention  the 
objedtions  vye  have  to  make  againft  it.  And,  as 
*'  the  friends  of  the  Church,  to  ufe  the  Dr*s  words, 
pag.  III.  are  defirous  to  know  what  can  be  faid, 
or  fuggeiled,  againft  an  American  Epifcopate,  in 
the  form  wherein  it  is  propofed  to  fettle  it",  and 
have  "  requefted  thofe  who  have  any  thing  to  of- 
fer, to  conBne  themfelves  to  this  particular  point", 
I  (hall  endeavour  their  gratification  ;  and  the  ra- 
ther, that  they  might  not  have  it  to  fay,  *'  the  ob- 
jections are  not  to  the  purpofc",  as  not  being  a^ 
gainft  the  plan  that  was  propofed. 

Object.  I.  The  government  and  difcipline  of 
the  Church  of  England,  under  the  propofed  Ame- 
rican Epifcopate,  is  injurious,  both  ro  the  Church, 
^nd  the  Bifhops  that  are  to  prefide  over  it. 

It  is  injurious  to  the  Church.     One  of  the  grand 
pleaS;  in  favor  of  the  miffior.  of  Biihops  to  the  Co- 
lonies^ 


t^a-    The  Appeal  to  the  PubHc  anfwered. 

Ionics,  has  all  along  been,  the  "  lamentably  wretch- 
ed ftate"   of  the   Epifcopal    Churches   in    being 
*'  without  government  and  difcipline"  for  want  of 
them.',  and  yet,  according  to  ihis  Plan,  '*  the  au- 
j;hQrity  of  Bifhops",  if  they  are  fent,  "  fball  operate 
only  on  the  Clergy,  not  the  L.aiiy",  even  of  the 
members  of  the  Church  of  England.     We  are 
fully  failsfied  with   that;  part  of  the  Plan,   which 
limits  iheir  authority   vvithiQ    the  bounds   of   the 
Epifcopai  Churches,   and  provides   for   it's  "  not 
operating  upon  other  denomiaanAns  of  cbriftians". 
This  we    think   is   highly  ceafonable.     gut   why 
fliould  the   government  of  thefe  8ifliops    be  con- 
fined to  the  Clergy  of  the  Church   of  England  ? 
Why  may  not  it's  Laity  alfo  be  favored  with   the 
benefitof  their  governing  authority  r*  If  thisChurch 
is  in  fuffering  circumftanccs,  in   poii^t   of  govern- 
ment and  difcipline  for  want  of  Bifhops,  and   to  fo 
great  a  degree  as  to  juflifie  the  complaint  of"  un- 
precedented hardfhip,  intolerable  grievance",  why 
Ihould  not  the  Laity,  as  well  as  Clergy,  be  reliev- 
ed by   their  mifiion  ?    Are  it*s    Clergy   it's    only 
members  that   need   government  and   difcipline  ? 
Arelhey,  beyond   all  others,  inclined   to   vice,  or 
diforderly  in    their  condudl  ?  It  is   to   be  hored, 
this  is  not  the  real  truth  :  Or  if  it  was,  it   v/ould 
not  be  a  juftification  of  this  part  of  the  Plan.     For, 
if  government  in  the  hands  of  Bifhops  is  an  infli- 
tution  of  Chrift,  and  intended  for  the  benefit    of", 
the  Church,  including  the   Laity,  as   well  as   the 
Clergy,  v^hy  is  this  dillindion  made  ?  What  ima- 
ginable good  reafon  can  be  given,  why  the  former, 
as  truly  as   the  latter,  fhould  not   be  partakers   of 
this  benefit  ?  By  the   conftitution  of  the  Englifh' 
Church,  the  Laity  as  well  as  Clergy  are  put  under 
the  governing  care  of  Billiops  5  and  their  autho- 


The  Appeal  lo  the  Public  anfwered.      T43 

Hty,  at  home,  extends  to  both,  to  the  one  as  truly 
as  to  the  other.  Ancl  why  fhouid  not  the  Epifco- 
pal-Colonifts  enjoy  the  fame  happy  privilege  ? 
The  plain  truth  is,  they  are  hardly  treated  in  this 
Plan.  They  are  not  merely  negleded  ;  but,  what 
is  much  worfe,  exprefs  prov.fion  is  made  that  they 
fhall  be  excluded  the  benefit  of  the  .governing  au- 
thority  of  their  Biaops.  .  Is  this  reafonable  ?  Will 
they,  will  the  world,  think  it  is  ? 

It  is  injurious  to  the  Biihops  alfo  it  is  propofed 
Ihould  be  lent  to  theColonies.  They  are,  in  a  meer 
arbitrary  manner,  reftrained  in  the  exercife  of  thai 
authority,  which,  in  ihc  judgment  of  thefe  very 
Planners,  properly  belongs  to  them  both  by 
apodolic  appointment,  and  the  conftiution  of  the 
Church  of  England.  Why  then  fhouid  they  be 
deprived  of  one  half  of  that,  which  is  their  jufl 
right  ?  if  it  is  fit,  they  fhoula  be  allowed  the  ex- 
ercife of  their  authority  in  the  government  of  th^ 
Epilcopal-laity  at  home,  why  not  m  America  ? 
What  good  reafon  can  be  afTigned  for  makmg  this 
wide  difference  ?  If  Biihops  are  fent  hither,  the 
Laity  of  the  Epifcopal  Churches  are  as  properly 
the  obje6ts  of  their  government,  as  the  Clergy  ; 
and,  if  they  are  confidered  either  as  ofScers  of 
Chrid,  or  of  the  Church  of  England,  it  as  truly 
belongs  to  them  to  exercife  a  governing  authority 
over  the  one  as  the  other.  .  The  limitation  of  their 
power,  propofed  in  the  Plan,  is  therefore  an  un- 
reafonable  invafion  of  their  juft  right  as  Bifliops  ; 
Vea,  if  the  government  of  the  Church,  as  the  Dr. 
has  endeavoured  to  prove,  is  lodged  by  Chrill,  and 
his  Apoftles,  with  fuch  Bifhops  as  he  would  have 
fent  to  America,  will  it  not  favour  of  fpiritual 
robbery  10  deprive  them  of  it  in   any  part  ?  And 

why 


144    ^h^  Appeal  to  the  Public  atifwereci. 

why  fliould  any  attempt  to  do  fo  ?  What  fpecial 
end  the  formers  of  this  Plan  might  have  in  their 
view,  by  thus  limiting_ their  Bifhops  authoiity,  1 
am  not  able  to  fay.  It  is  not  eafie  to  conceive 
what  advantage  they  could  propofe  to  gain  hereby. 
But,  whatever  their  end  was,  they  have  certainly 
laid  their  American  Bifhops  under  redraints,  id 
regard  of  governing  authority,  that  are  injurious 
to  them  as  well  as  the  Laity,  as  they  do  not  allow 
them  the  exercife  of  thofe  rights,  which,  they 
themfelves  think,  properly  belong  to  them,  as^ 
officers  in  the  kindom  of  Chrift. 

Object.  II.  The  Bifhops,  in  this  plan,  are  {q 
widely  different  from  the  Bifhops  of  the  Church 
of  England  at  home,  that  it  is  not  reafopable  they 
fhould  be  either  defired,  or  fent.  The  Bifhops, 
propofed  for  the  Colonies,  befides  being  re- 
llrained  in  the  exercife  of  their  authority  to  the 
Clergy  only,  are  to  be  ftript  of  all  that  civil  pow- 
er, which  is,  in  England,  annexed  to  their  eccle- 
fiaflical.  And,  if  we  may  depend  on  the  Dr's 
word,  they  are,  moreover,  to  have  no  spiritual 
COURTS.  For  he  fays,  pag.  95.  "  if  our  Ameri- 
can Bifhops  are  to  have  no  authority  over  diffen- 
ters,  nor  indeed  16  eiercife  difcipline  over  our  own 
people,  the  Clergy  excepted  ;  then  the  frightful 
objedlion  of  fpirilual  courts  intirely  vanifhes.  For 
if  no  authority  of  this  kind  will  be  claimed,  orex» 
ercifed  by  them,  we  may  be  fure  that  no  Courts 
will  be  eredted  for  the  exercife  of  it'*.  What  kind 
of  Bifhops  are  here  provided  for  the  Colonies  ? 
How  amazingly  different  from  the  Bifliops  at 
home  ?  Is  it  rcafonable  to  expedt  the  mifTiofli 
of  fuch  ?  I  may  rather  fay,  is  it  reafonable 
fo  much  as  to  dcfirc  their  mifTion  ?   Have  not  the 

Diffenteri! 


'^he  Appeal  to  the  Public  anlweved.     14  j 

Difienters  in  England  been  complaining  for  more 
than  an  hundred  years  of  the  difficulncs  and  hard- 
Ihips,  arifing.from  the  unnatural  jundion  of  civil 
and  fpiritual  powers  in  thefe  Churchrofticers  ?  Yea, 
have  noc  Epiicopalians  themfelves,  Bifliops  as  well 
as  others  of  inferior  rank,  joined  with  them  in  ar« 
deni:  wilhes,  and  importunate  i.ncreaties,  for  a 
change  in  the  fpiritual  courts,  at  Icaft  as  to  their 
manner  of  adminiftration  ?  And  fhall  a  compara- 
tive handful  of  Epifcopal  prp^efTors,  mod  of  whom, 
in  many  of  the  Colonies,  are  io  inruiBcient^  as  thac 
^hey  are  upheld  in  being,  with  reipcct  to  their 
religious  denomination^  at  the  charitable  expence 
of  a  diftant  Society  5  I  fav.  (h\i\\  ihefe  imagine 
themfelves  fp  important,  as  that,  for  their  fakes, 
the  powers  and  appendages,  of  Bifliops.fhall  be  fo 
mightily  abridged  ?  Surely,  the  whole  body  of 
iDiffencers  in  England,  and  a  very  confiderable  pare 
of  the  eflabliflied  Church  there,  are  as  well  worthy 
pf  the  national  attention  ;  and  it  is  as  fie,  their  re-r 
quefts,  often  repeatedjll-kould  be  anfwered.  Wr.cn 
this  is  done,  it  will  be  time,  and  not  before,  ro  ex-^ 
ped  that  this  plan  fhoiild  be  confidered,  and  brb't 
into  effedl. 

Not  that  we  obje(5V  agatnfl:  the  propofed  abr'dg- 
ment  of  the  power  of  Bidiops  as  un^eafonablc  in 
itfelf.  We  think,  on  the  contrai.y,  it  is  a  wife  and 
equitable  alteration  -,  and  heartily  wifh,  rhat  thefe 
appendages,  quite  extraneous  to  the  office  of  Bi- 
fiiops,  and  greatly  prejudicial  to  the  faithful  exe- 
cution of  it,  may  no  more  be  united  with  it.  The 
iboner  they  are  disjoined,  and  forever  feparated,  the 
better.  It  would,  we  apprehend,  tend  greatly  to 
promote  the  good  of  the  Church  of  Chrift.  But 
what  we  object  is,  the  partiality  of  the  propofal  j 
T  it's 


14^     The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anlwered* 

it's  being  confined  to  the  Colonies,  and  not  ex- 
tended to  the  Vsothercountry.  For  if  this  plan- 
ned reftraint  is  reafonable  in  icfelf,  it  is  as  reafona- 
ble  it  fhould  take  place  there^  as  here  ;  and  to  de- 
fire  it  here  upon  any  other  plan  than  luch  an  ex- 
tenfive  one  as  fhall  operate  in  England,  as  well  as 
Arnerica,  appears  to  us  inconfiftent  and  abfurd. 

It  may  deferve  confideration,  as  uniformity  is 
one  of  the  main  things  aimed  at  in  the  conltitu- 
tion  of  the  Church  of  England,  whether  it  would 
comporE  with  this  defign  to  mai^e  the  propofed 
difference  between  Bifhops  here  and  at  home  ? 
Are  they  not  ofRcers  of  one  and  the  fame  Church, 
and  of  equal  rank  and  degree  ?  Why  then  (hould 
they  be  thus  veiled  with  different  powers?  How 
diffimilar  would  be  the  appearance  of  fuch  Bifhops  ? 
Would  it  not  hurt,  if  not  quite  deftroy  theChurch's 
uniformity,  in  regard  of  it's  officers?  And  what 
muft  we  think  of  a  conftitution,  that  would  clothe 
precifely  the  fame  ofBcers  of  the  fame  Church, 
not  with  the  fame,  but  with  widely  differing  pow- 
ers ?  Would  it  argue  confiRent  regularity  in  the 
conftitution  ? 

It  ought  to  be  confidered  yet  farther,  if  Bifhops 
Ihould  be  fent  to  the  Colonies  with  thefe  retrained 
powers,  whether  undefirable  confequences  might 
not  be  naturally  feared,  both  htre,  and  at  home  ? 

Would  it  be  unreafonable  to  fuppofe,  that  the 
Bifhops  here  would  be  difpuJed  to  throw  off  this 
reftraint  as  foon  as  might  be  ?  Would  it  be  any 
other  than  what  has  been  done  a  tboufand  times 
over,  if  they  fliould  embrace  all  opportunities,  in 
the  vigorous  ufe  of  all  likely  means  lo  recover 

thefe 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered.     147 

tbefe  appendages  to  their  office  they  have  been*  de- 
prived of  ?  Would  it  not  be  a  good  plea  in  their 
favour,  thai  they  aimed  at  nothing  more,  than  be- 
ing upon  a  par  wirh  their  brcihcrn  in  the  fame 
office  ?  HaveBifhops,  in  the  feveral  part  ages  of  the 
Church,  difcovered  fuch  want  of  ambition,  and  fo 
great  a  difmclination  to  the  enlargement  of  their 
Iphere  of  power,  as  to  render  ic  in  the  lead  degree 
improbable,  that  they  would  aft  in  the  manner  that 
has  been  defcribed  ?  Nay,  the  Dr.  himfelf  has 
been  fo  off  his  guard,  as  even  to  fugged,  *  that,  in 
lime  to  come,  they  '*  may  be  vefted  with  fuch  a 
degree  of  civil  power,  as  may  be  worthy  of  their 
acceptance",  and  to  juftifie  the  thing  itfelf.  What 
he  has  faid,  upon  this  head,  may  be  confidered  ia 
it's  proper  place. 

And,  at  home^  would  there  be  no  likely  hood  of 
uneafmefs,  in  confequence  of  an  American  Epif- 
copate  upon  this  plan  ?  iVlight  not  the  vaft  num- 
bers there,  who  have  long  complained  of  the  too 
largely  extended  power  claimed  and  exerciied  by 
Biffiops,  think  themfelves  hardly  treated,  that  no 
regird  ihould  be  paid  to  their  intreaties,  while  a 
comparatively  few  inconfiderable  profeffors  of  the 
Church  of  England  in  America  are  heard,  and  ai> 
Epifcopate  fettle^  for  them  according  to  their 
mind  ?  And  would  even  the  Bifhops  themfelves  at 
home  be  pleafcd  with  the  propofed  limitation  of 
the  authority  of  Biihops  here  ?  Would  they  not 
eafily  and  naturally  argue  from  what  was  done 
in  the  Colonies,  to  what  might,  with  as  much 
reaion,  be  done  in  England  ?  If  Bifhops  in  Amr- 
rica  may  be  as  faithful  m  their  office,  and  do  cheir 
duty  as  well,  without  fpiritual  courts  and  c\w\\ 
T  2  power^ 

*  Pag.  no. 


^48     The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfvvered,, 

power,  as  with  them,  what  need  of  thefe  annexed 
appendages  at  home  ?  Why  may  net  Bifliops  there 
be  as  reafonably  reftrained  in  their  authority,  as 
Bifhops  in  the  Golonies  ?  Jc  can  fcarce  be  fuppofed 
it  fhould  efcape  the  thought  of  our  EnglifhBriliops, 
that  the  (ettlemenc  of  fuch  an  Epilcopate  in  Ame- 
rica, as  is  here  propofed,  may  prepare  the  v^ay  for 
fuch  a  change  in  the  power  of  Bifhops  at  homes 
as  they  would  not  be  very  fond  of. 

I  SHALL  not  think  it  unnecefTary,  before  I  leave 
this  obje6tion,  10  oblerve,  that  not  only   the  Dr. 
but  the  Clergy  that  defired  him  to  write,  and  their 
fuperiors  at  home  alfo,  feem   to   be  united  in    the 
thought,  that,  if  Bifhops  are  fent  to  the  Colonies, 
it  would  be   reasonable    they  fhould  be   fuch,  as 
rtey  have  defcribed,  that  is,  Bifhops  divefted  of  ali 
powei^  but  thai,'which  they  call  *'  purely  fpiritual"  : 
ptherwifej  they  would  not  have  been  at  the  pains  . 
to  prepare^  and  publifli  their  plan  of  an  Amierican 
EpifcopatCi  '  We  all  as  one  join  wiih  them  in  this 
ientiment.'    If  Bifhops    are  lent  to  the  Colonies' 
wi|h  civil  as  well  as  Ipiritual  powers,  and  claim  it 
as  their  right  to  concern  themfelves  here,  as   they 
do  "at  home,  v/iih  the  Probate  of  Wills,  letters  of 
Guardian-ihip' and  Adminiftr^tion,  holding   their 
courts,  and  ading'as  judges  in  matters  of  this  na- 
ture, it  would  introduce  an  eifential  change  in  the 
fettled  conflitution  of  the  Colonies  upon  this  head, 
and  vacate"  all   their  lavv^s  relative  thereto.     And 
this  is  ah  alteration  that  would  afFelt  all  denomi«» 
nations  among  U5,  Epifcopali^ns  in  "common   with 
others  ;  infomnch,  that  they  themfelves  would  nor 
defire  Bifhops  fhould  come  here  vefted  with  fuch 
fjovyer,  '  |t  is  not  fuppofed,  there  are  a   fcore  of 
this  denomination,  in  all  ihe  Coloniesj  who  would 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered.     143 

be  gratified  with  fo  deftru6live  an  eflablifliment. 
It  would,  without  all  controverfie,  be  the  occafioii 
6f  univerfal  confufion.     Inilead  of  that  peace  and 
(juiet  we  now   enjoy,  there  would  be  noife  and 
tlamor,  anger,  wrath,  ftrife,  and  all  manner  of  difr 
tradlion  :      Efpecially    would   this    be    the  confe-^ 
quence,  if  thele  Bilhops,  in   the  exercife  of  their; 
Authority,  fhould  interfere  with  the  religious  liber- 
ties ani  privileges  of  other  denominations.     Thefe 
their  fathers  purchafed  for   them   at   a   very  dear 
rate,  thefe  tLey  value  as  their  deareft  intereft,  and, 
rather  than    be    deprived    of  them,   they    would 
chearfuily  fubmit  to  the  lofs  even  of  life  itfelf.     Ic 
is  not  therefore   imagined   by   Epifcopalians,  any 
more  than  other  denominations,  that  this   kind  of 
BiQiops  will  be  thought  proper  for   the  Colonies  ; 
nor  can  it  be  fuppofed,  thiey  will  be  ever  fent,  un- 
lefs  a  change  in  the  (late  of  affairs  at  home  IhoulcJ 
unhappily  take  place,  that  will  be  as  detrimental 
to  theni,  as  it  will  be  to  us. 

Object.  III.  The  Church  of  England  knows 
no  fuch  Bifhops  as  are  fpeciiied  in  this  plan,  nor 
can  th-y,  in  (ionfiftency  with  ic's  conftitution,  be 
fent  to  the  Colonies.  The  American  Bifliops,  fays 
the  Plan,  ''  (hall  have  no  authority  but  purely  of 
a  fpintual  and  ecclefiaftical  nature,  fuch  as  is  al- 
together FROM  THE  Church,  not  from 
THE  State";  that  is,  in  plain  Englifh,  they  fhall 
have  no  authority  at  all  as  officers  in  the  Church 
of  England. 

If  by  this  ''  purely  fpiritual  authority"  is  meant, 
authority  that  has  for  it's  objedl  only  the  con- 
cerns of  religion,  and  the  fouls  of  men,  it  is  ac- 
knowledged, it  may  be  thus  confined.     This  was 

the 


150    The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered. 

the  only  authority  of  Bifhops,  whether  we  under-' 
Hand  the  word  in  the  Epilcopalian  fenfe,  or  our's, 
jn  apoftolic  times,  and  atterwards,  until  Conllan- 
tine  became  a  thriftian  by  profcffion.  And  it 
"would  have  been  happy  for  ihe  Church  of  Ch rill, 
if  civil  power  had  never  been  annexed  to  that 
office,,  which  has  nothing  to  do  but  with  the  fpi- 
ritual  intererts  of  men.  But  then,  it  is  to  be  re- 
membered, that  this  authority,  at  leaft  as  to  it's 
cxercile  in  the  Church  of  England,  is  not  alto- 

GEiHER  FROM  THE  ChURCH,  aod  NOT  FROM 

THE  State  -,  nor  can  this  be  the  cafe,  conform- 
ably to  it's  prefent  eftablifhment.  Is  not  the 
King  the  acknowledged  supreme  head  of  this 
Church  ?  Does  it  own  any  fof  BiQiops,  or  can 
there  be  any,  without  his  licence  for  their  eJedion, 
and  nommating  the  perfons  that  fliail  be  chofen  ? 
And  when  they  have  been  eleded  and  conlecrated, 
can  they  exercife  the  leaft  authority,  even  in  fpi- 
ritual  and  ecclefiaftical  matters,  but  by  him., 
and  within  the  limits  that  have  been  pointed  out 
to  them  by  the  State  ?  Can  they  vary  a  tijfle 
from  it's  prelcribed  orders  in  any  one  thing  per- 
taining to  the  exercife  of  authority  ?  Are  they  net 
obliged  to  the  uie  of  thole  forms  of  prayer,  that 
mode  of  ordination,  and  that  n:ianner  of  admi- 
niftring  the  facramenfi;  the  State  has  enjoined  ? 
Is  there  any  orse  part  of  govrrnmrnt  or  difc^phne 
ihey  can  de[  art  ftom,  or  alrer  ?  How  then  fhouid 
their  "  authority  be  altogether  from  the 
Church,  not  from  ihe  State"  ?  Can  that  au- 
thority, with  any  fnew  of  realbn,  have  this  affirm- 
ed of  it,  which  cannot  be  obtairjed  withour  the  in- 
tervening pleafure  of  the  King,  and,  when  ob- 
tained, cannot  be  exerciled  but  w«ihin  cerfain  li-^ 
mits,  which  have  been  afcertainsd  by  the  State  ?• 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  artfwered.     151 

To  rpfak  of  that  authority  as  altogether  frorrt 
the  Church,  which  is  lo  cffentia^iy   •Jtptnaent  oa 
the   State,    that    it  cannot  be  havi  but  in  com- 
pliance  with  the  laws   it  has  made,   nor   e<'"'''!fed 
but  in  conformity  to  them,  is  highly   inro^.dll  nt« 
It  is  indeed  this  dependance  on    the  State,     oc- 
withitanding  the  defired  authority    altogether 
from  the  Church,  that  is  the  true  lourcc  ot   all 
the  hardfhips  and   grievances,  on  account  of  the 
want  of  Bifhops   in  America,   that    have   been  (o 
bitterly  complained  of    Did  Bifhops  ot  the  Cnurch 
of  England   no  more  depend   on  the  State,  and 
no  more    derive  their  authority   from  it,  than  our 
'minifters  do,  the  Epilcopal  Churches  here  might  as 
well  be  fupplied  with  Bilhops,  as  our's  a^e  w  rh  Pa- 
ftors.     Wh<5t  fhould  hinder  ?   The  Api  'dies  \\  1  heir 
day,  and  their  fuccelTors  afterwards  for  many  years, 
were  veiled  with   fpiritual  powers,  ?nd  exercifed 
them,  according  to  the  inilitution  of  Chrill,  with- 
out the  intervening  help  of  any  civil  date   what- 
ever.     And   why   may  not   the  officers  of  God*s 
fpiritual  kingdom  now  he  veiled  with  like  powers, 
and  go  on  in  the  exercife  of  them,  in  the  fame  way  ? 
Our  EpifcopalianColonills  make  fome  pretences  to 
this,  while  they  fay,  the  Bfliops  they  propole  fhould 
be  fent  to  America  "  Ihall  have   no  authority  but 
fuch  as  is  altogether   from  the  Church"; 
but  what  a  vain   pretence  is   this  ?  How  ablurd  ? 
when  they  know  that  Bilhops  can  have  no  authority 
in  the  Church  of  England,  but  from  the  State  ? 
If  they  may  be  vefted  with  authority,  it  cannot  be* 
exercifed,  as  officers  in  this  Church,  but  from  the 
King,   and    altogether   conformably     to    the 
ORDERS  of  the  State.     If  i:  had  been  only  faid, 
the  Colon y-Biffiops  ffiall  have  no  other  th^iu  purely 
fpiritual  authority,  nor  exercife  any   other,  this 

would 


t^2     The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwerecJL 

would  have  been  inrelligible  and"  confident  ;  but 
to  propofe  that  they  fhouldhave  this  auihori- 
ty  not  at  all  from  the  State,  as  muft  be  the 
cafe  if  it  is  altogeher  from  the  Church, 
is  to  propofe  that  which  is  incompaiible  with  the 
King's  supremacy  in  all  fpiritual  and  ecclefiafti- 
cal  macters,  and  iubverfive  of  that  State-power^ 
by  which  the  Church  of  England  has  been  efta- 
blid-itd.  It  cannot  therefore  be  fuppofed,  but  that 
ihis  part  of  the  plan  fhauld  be  rejeded,  both  by 
the  King  and  Paniameat. 

Object.  IV.  We  are,  in  principle,  againft  a)} 
civil  eftabliihments  in  religion  ;  and  as  we  do  not 
defire  any  fuch  eftabliiliment  in  fupport  of  our 
own  religious  fentiments,  or  pradice,  ve  cannot 
reafonably  be  blamed,  if  we  are  not  difpofed  to 
encourage  one  in  favor  of  theEpifcopal-Colonifts. 
We  profefs  to  "  fear  God,  and  honor  the  King"  5 
dec-laring  our  readinefs  to  obey,  in  fubordination 
£0  the  allegience  we  owe  to  him  who  has  been 
conftituted.  *'  Head  over  all  things",  the  "powers 
ordained  of  God'"  to  bear  rule  over  us.  We  ac- 
knowledge, v/ith  humble  gratitude,  the  favor  of 
our  rightful  Sovereign,  in  allowing  us  the  enjoy* 
ment  of  thofe  "  liberties,  wherewith  Chrift  has 
made  his  difciples  free"  ^  though  we  judge,  at  the 
fame  time,  and  upon  folid  reaion,  as  we  imagine, 
that  we  have  a  juft  right  to  think  for  our  felves  in 
matters  of  religion,  and,  in  confequence  of  this 
right,  to  worfhip  God  in  that  way,  which,  we  ap- 
prehend, will  be  mod  acceptable  to  him  ;  and, 
\vhile  we  do  this,  "  leading  quiet  and  peaceable 
Jives,  in  all  godlinefs  and  honefty",  we  th?nk  far- 
ther, we  have  a  claim  to  the  protedion  of  the  State, 
and   the  benefit  of  thofe  laws  it  has  made,  or 

reafonabl^ 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered.     155 

reafonably  may  make,  for  the  fecurlty  of  it's  loyal 
fubjeds  in  the  exercife  of  their  rights  and  liber- 
ties, whether  civil  or  religious.  But  we  defirc  nor, 
and  fuppole  we  have  no  right  to  defire,  the  inter- 
pofuioa  of  the  (late  to  eftai)liih  our  fentiments  ia 
religion,  or  the  manner  in  which  we  would  exp  t[s 
them  And,  as  we  do  not  defire  this  for  our  felves, 
ic  would  be  hard  to  expedl  we  (hould  define  it  ia 
behalf  of  others.  It  does  noi  indeed  appear  to 
us,  that  God  has  entruftf^d  the  (late  with  a  right 
to  make  religious  eltabhniments.  If  the  (late  ia 
England  has  this  delegated  au.horicy,  mud  it  not 
be  Ovvned,  that  the  ftate  in  China,  in  Turkey,  ia 
Spain,  has  this  authority  alfo  ?  What  (hould  make 
the  difference,  in  the  eye  of  true  reafon  ?  Hath  the 
flate  in  England  been  diftinguiPaed  by  heaven  by 
any  peculiar  grant,  beyond  the  (late  in  other  Coun- 
tries ?  If  it  has,  let  the  grant  be  produced.  If  it 
has  not,  all  dates  have,  in  common,  the  fame  au- 
thority. And  as  they  mud  feverally  be  fuppofed 
to  exert  this  authoriry  in  edabliHiments  conform- 
able to  their  own  fentiments  in  religion  ;  whatcaa 
the  confequence  be,  but  infinite  damage  to  the 
caufe  of  God  and  true  religion  ?  And  fuch  in  fadt 
has  been  the  confequence  of  thefe  edabiifhments 
in  all  ages,  and  in  all  places.  What  abfurdities  ia 
fentiment,  and  ridiculous  follies,  not  to  fay  grofs 
immoralities,  in  pradice,  have  not  been  edabliOied 
by  the  civil  power  in  fome  or  other  of  the  nations 
of  the  earth  ?  Even  in  chridian  Countries,  fo  call- 
ed, has  not  that  been  eftabliflied  for  the  religion  of 
Jefus,  which,  for  the  greater  part  by  far,  palpably 
contradidled  the  principles  of  common  fenfe  ?  Has 
not  a  power  been  religioufly  eftablifhed  in  oppofi- 
tion  to  Chrift,  that  has  exalted  itfelf  "  above  all 
that  is  called  God",  and  that  has  filled  the  earth 
U  with 


i^    ^he  Appeal  to  thc'f  ublic  anf^^ered, 

with  the  blood  of  thofe,  who  chofe   death,  in   th6 
nicft  hidtoufly  contrived  forms,  rather  than  to  pay 
homage  to  fuch  an  Idol  of  falfe  woifliip  ?  Yea,  in 
England  itfelf,  has  not  the  religion  of  Chrift,  under 
popifh  ellablifnments,  been    debafed,   corrupted, 
and  turned  into  a  meer  farce  ?  And,  fince  the  re- 
formation, what  has  been   fo  great  an  obilacle  to 
Gofpel-fimplicity  and   purity  of  worfhip,   as   that 
eflabliihment,   whrch,  having  once  obtained,  the 
Urongell:   reafonings,  and   moil  earned   intreaties, 
have  not  availed  to  effect  an  alteration  in  it,  not  fo 
much  as  in  acknowledged  exceptionable  articles  ? 
•We  are  not  convinced^   that  religious  eftablifh- 
ments  arc  at  all  adapted  to  ferve  the  caufe  of  truth 
and  virtue  ;  but  are  rather  perluaded,  they   have 
been,  and  ever  will  be,  greatly  detiimental  to  the 
prevalence  of  real  genuine  Chriftianity.     And   as 
theAmcricanColonies,af  lead  many  of  them,  are,  at 
prefent,   free  from  difficulties  and  embarafments 
by  means  of  fuch  e{lablii]:iments,  we  cannot  but 
hope  they  will  always  remain  fo.     It  ought  not  to 
be  fuppofed,  that  thofe  Colonies  fhould  be  fond  of 
an  citabhfhed  Epifcopate,   which  were  fettled    by 
fuch  as  were  driven  from  their  native  land  by  the 
oppreffive    exercife     of    Prelatical    power.       We 
fhould  exprefs  but  little  regard  to  the  memory  of 
our  Progenitors,  and  lefs  gratitude  for  their  pious 
care,  in  oppofnion  to   heavier  tryals,   and   greater 
hardfliips,  than  we  can  now  eafiiy  conceive  of,  to 
tranfmit  religion  to  us  free  from  all  yokes  of  bon- 
dage,  if  we  fhould  encourage  the  eftablilbment  of 
that  very  power  which  was  fo  injurioufly  harralTing 
to  them,  and  may  in  time  be  lo  to  us. 

Object.  V.     The  Church  of  England  in  the 
Colonies,  in  it's  comparative  k)w  ftate,  inflead  of  an 

Epifcopate, 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered.  ^  155 

Epifcopate,  upon  this  plan,  or  any  other,  needs 
rather  the  charitable  aliiftance  of  it's  friends  to 
fupport  it's  present  minifters,  and  others  that  are 
ftill  wanted.  In  Norrh-Carolina,  the  rehgious  flate 
of  things,  by  all  accounts,  is  deplorably  lad-  The 
public  worfhip  of  God,  in  any  form,  i>  flrangely 
negledted  ;  and  they  have  few,  very  few,  minifters 
to  officiate  in  gorpel-adminiltrations.  I'har  chari- 
ty, which  might  be  fufficient  for  the  maintenance 
of  as  many  MifTionaries  as  would  be  needful  there, 
would  be  fwallowed  up  by  one  Bifhop  only.  And 
would  this  fo  much  tend  to  the  honor  of  God,  and 
the  good  of  fouls,  as  if  it  was  expended  in  fupport 
of  Miffions  that  are  really  neceffary  ?  I  fiiall  only 
fay  of  Virginia,  and  Maryland,  that  it  can  do  them 
no  harm,  if  we  heartily  wifh,  that  a  better  and  more 
general  regard  was  paid  thereto  the  inftitutions  of 
JefusChrilt.  As  to  the  other  Colonies,  extending 
from  Penfylvania  to  the  northerpmoft  bounds  of 
the  MafTachufetts- Province,  notwithftanding  the 
pious  care  of  the  Society  at  home,  and  the  vad; 
charity  they  have  annually  been  expending  in  fa- 
vor of  the  Church  of  England,  from  their  firfl;  in- 
corporation to  this  day,  it  has  grown  but  little  in 
comparifon  with  the  other  denominations  of  chfilli- 
ans,  not  having  got  as  yet  beyond  it's  infant  ftate. 
Perhaps  there  are  not  more  Epifcopal  Churches 
in  thefe  Colonies,  than  there  have  been  thoufands 
of  pounds  fterling  expended  towards  bringing 
them  into  exigence  \  and  they  are,  by  far  the 
greater  part  of  them,  in  fo  weak  and  low  a  fl:ate,' 
that  there  v/ould  be  no  hope  of  their  continuance 
in  being,  if  that  charity  was  with-held,  which,  aE 
firft,  gave  it  to  them  :  Whereas,  the  Churches  of 
other  denominations,  without  any  charitable  help 
from  home,  or  elfewhere,  are  become  a  great  mul- 
U  z.  titgdw^. 


1^6    The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered. 

titude,  rapidly  increafing  in  all  parrs  of  the  Coun- 
try, in  the  fame  proportion  beyond  the  Epifcopal 
Churches,  as  they  have  all  along  done  from  the 
beginning.  At  the  largeft:  computation,  there  are 
not  more  than  twenty  fix  or  feven  thoufand  Epif- 
copalians  in  thefe  feven  Colonies,  v^hich  contain 
the  greateft  number  of  inhabitants  on  the  Ameri- 
can Continent  ;  and  of  thefe,  it  would  be  no  wrong 
to  the  truth  if  it  fhould  be  faid,  a  very  confidera- 
ble  part  went  over  to  the  Church,  not  fo  much 
upon  fober  inquiry  and  real  principle,  as  from  dif-v 
gull  at  their  Parifh-minifler,  or  unhappy  prejudices 
arifing  from  the  placing  of  a  Meeting-houfe,  or 
fome  fuch  important  difficulty  in  the  towns  where 
they  lived.  In  this  view  of  the  matter,  which  is 
certainly  a  juil*  and  true  one,  what  occafion  is  there 
for  the  miffion  of  Bifhops  ?  Efpecially,  as  their  au- 
thority is  not  to  extend  to  the  Epifcopal  Laity. 
Would  it  not  anfwer  much  better  ends,  to  beftow 
that  charity  it  will  require  to  fupport  Bifhops,  in 
providing  for  thofe  Churches  that  muft  come  to 
330thing,  if  they  are  not  fupported  in  this  way  ? 

It  may  be    worthy  of  fpecial   notice  here,  one 
great  complaint  in  bthalf  of  theEpirccpal  Churches 
is,  that  numbers  of  them  are  deflitute  ofminifters. 
This  want  of  minifters  cannot  wiih  more  truth  and 
juilice  be  attributed  to  any  caufe,  than  the  want  of 
money  for  the  fupport  of  more   miflions.     The 
Society  at  home,  the    grand  fource    of  charitable 
help,  have  fetn   fit,  of  late  years,  to   leflen    their 
grants  in  fupport  of  their  Miffionaries,  for  no  other 
reaXon,  it  is  prefumcd,  than  their  inability  to  make 
larger  ones  ;  and  to  the  fame   inability  it    is,  we 
believe,  chiefly  owing,  that  there    are  no   miflions 
in  the  places  where  they  are   wanted.     And,    aa 

thi$ 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered.     157 

this  is  the  cafe,is  it  prudent  to  defire  anEpifcopate^ 
which  will  be  attended  with  a  vaft  charge,  which 
mud  be  defrayed  iome  way  or  other  ?  It  (hould 
feem  as  though  it  would  be  time  enough  to  defire 
Bifhops,  when  the  Church  is  able  to  ftand  upon 
it's  own  legs,  and  to  fupport  it's  own  inferior  Cler- 
gy, as  well  as  fuch  fuperior  officers  as  Bifhops. 
Things  are  not  ripe,  as  yet,  for  an  Epifcopate. 
The  Church  muft  get  ftronger  footing  in  the  Co- 
lonies before  this  may  reafonably  be  thought  of  ; 
and  there  is  no  probable  way,  in  which  it-  can  at- 
tain to  this  ftrength,  but  by  employing  all  the  pi- 
ous charity  that  can  be  coliedled  for  the  better 
fupporting  the  prefent  Miffions,  and  providing 
for  ftill  more  :  Though  after  all,  it  is  very  quefti- 
onable,  whether,  even  with  this  help,  the  Church 
will  foon  arrive  at  fuch  a  ftate  of  maturity,  as  to 
make  it  worth  while  for  a  Bifhop  to  come  here. 

Other  objedions  we  have  to  make  againfl:  the 
plan  that  has  been  propofed  ;  but  as  they  co-incide 
with  what  has  been  powerfully  offered  by  the  late 
excellent  Dr.  Mayhew,  I  fhall  take  the  liberty  to 
infert  his  objedlions  at  large.  And  there  may  be 
a  fpecial  propriety  in  this,  not  only  as  we  efteem 
them  highly  pertinent,  and  indifputably  valid  ; 
but  as  they  were  wrote  in  anfvver  to  this  very  plan, 
which,  though  exhibited  by  one  "  who  is  fuppofed 
to  be  an  high  dignitary  of  the  Church",  and  de- 
clared, by  our  author,  to  be  fo  harmlefs,  in  every 
refpedt,  that  no  reafonable  obje6tions  can  be  offer- 
ed againft  it",  he  has  yet  fuffered  to  lie  expofed 
to  all  the  Dr.  has  laid  againft  it^  not  having  lifped 
a  word  in  reply  to  him. 

But,  before  T  prefent  the  reader,  with  what  Dr. 
Mayhew  has  faid  upon  this  fubjed,  I  would  briefly 

fuggeft 


,158     The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered. 

fuggeft  one  thing,    as  an  expedient  well  adapted 
to  com-promire  matters  between  Epifcopalians,  and 
other  Dtnominarions,   in  the  Colonies,   and    unite, 
them  all  in  love  and  peace.     Jt  is  this  ^    that  the- 
King  and  Parliament,  who  vefted  Bilhops  at  heme 
with  fjovernmg  and  ordaining  power  in  the  Church 
ot  England,  may,  if  in  their  wifdom  they  think  fit, 
lodge  the  fame  power  with  Prtfbyters  here.     And 
ihould  they  pleafe  to  do  this,  it  would  inftantly  put 
an  end  to  the  complaint  for  want  of  governing  and 
ordaining   authority   in    America.     There    would 
DOW  be  no  need  of  Bifliops,  as  Frefbyters  might, 
"with  as  much  valid  propriety,  govern   and  ordain 
in  the  Colonies,  as  Biibops  in  England.     For,   let 
It  be  particularly  noticed,  what  is  now   fuggefled 
is  perfedly  agreeable  to  the  principles  of  the  firfl 
founders  ot   the    reformed   Church    of  England. 
Governing  and  ordaining  power  was  not  given  to 
Bifhops,  becaufe  it  was  thought  they  were   an  or- 
der of  officers  fuperior  to  Frefbyters    by   divine 
RIGHT.     It  was  luppofed,  that  all  power  in    fpiri^ 
tuai  and  ecclefiaitical  matters,  as  well  as  temporal, 
was  vefted  in  the  King,  who  might  communicate 
it  to   what  fubordinate    mJnillcrs  he   pleafed      Ic 
was  upon  this  principle,  that  the  power  of  ordi- 
nation wasonce  delegated  trCrcn-weijaLAViMAN, 
as  the  King's  vice-gerent  ;    who,  in  virtue  of    the 
King's  acknowled(^cd  fupremacy,  had  then  as  full 
legal   authority    to    ordain  as  any    Bifhop   in   the 
kingdom.     Upon  this  fame  pvlncipic»j  "  Cranmer, 
*'Arch^Bi(]iop  ofCanterbury,BonneR3i^>'p  olLon- 
"  don,  &c.  took  out  cornn-iiilions  from  the  Crown, 
"  importing,  that,  becaufe  the  vicegerent  (Crom- 
"  wel,  a  lay  pcrlon)  could    not  perfonaHy,  attend 
*'  the  charge  in  all  parts  of  the  k'ngdom,  the  King 
l[  authorilcs  the  Bilhop  in  his  (the  King's)  (lead  to, 

brdaina' 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwerrJ,     159 

*'  ordain,  w'uhin  his  D  oceil,,  iuch  as  ht-  jidgcd 
*'  worthy  of  ho'y  orders  ;  to  col  are  ro  benefice^  ; 
*'  to  give  inftitucion  ;  and  to  execute  all  Ovhcr, 
"  parts  of  the  Epirci>pal  aurhoriry  ;  and  this  dur- 
"  ing  theKing's  pleafure  only".*  As  a  celebrated 
writer  argues,  "  from  thefc  Commifiions,  which 
*'  the  BiQiops  took  our,  efpecially  B  )nner's,  Bifhop 
"  of  London,  it  is  evident,  that  all  the  power  of 
*'  ORDINATION  which  the  Bifhops  had,  or  could 
*'  have  and  exercife  in  this  Kingdom,  they  derived 
"  entirely  from  the  civil  Magistrate,  and 
"  only  from  him.  And  that  this  really  is  the  cafe 
"  as  to  ecclefiaftical  orders  conferred  by  our  present 
"  Bifhops,  that  all  the  validity,  fignificancy  or 
"  weight  which  they  have  in  this  Church,  they 
*'  derive  purely  and  fokly  from  the  aurhority  of 
"  the  Magistrate,  inconreftibly  appears  from 
•'  hence  ;  namely,  that  the  magiftrate  has  autho^ 
*'  ritatively  directed  and  prefcrlbed  now  and  to 
*'  WHOM,  ordination  is  to  be  given.  And  {hould 
*^  an  ordmation  be  given  by  all  the  Bifhops  in  this 
"  Church  in  other  manner,  &  other  form, than 
"  that  prefcribed  by  the  magiftrate,  fuch  crdina- 
''  tion  would  be  of  no  legality  at  all,  nor  authority 
"  in  this  Church.  The  man  fo  ordained  would  be 
"  no  proper  minifter  in  the  Church  of  England. 
"  A  minifter  in  the  Church  of  Chrift,  he  pofTibly 
"  might  be  \  but  he  would,  I  repeat  it,  be  no 
*'  minifter  in  the  Church  of  England  ;  nor  would 
"  have  power  and  authority  to  officiate  as  a  prieft 
*'  therein,  — Nor  let  it  be  here  replied, — that  thefe 
"  Bifhops,  who  by  the  laws  of  England  are  ini' 
"  powered  to  ordain,  are  at  the  fame  time  to  be 

confidered 

*  Vid.  Examination  of  the  Codex  Juris,  pag.  32,  33.  as 
cited  by  the  DiiTent,  Gentleman,  pag,  24,  25, 


i6o    The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered. 

*'  confidered  zs  fuccejfors  of  the  Apoftles,  and  hav6 
*'  received  power  of  ordination  from  thefe  founders 
•'  of  the  chriftian  Church  by  an  uninterrupted  lineal 
"  defcent.  For  the  conftitution  and  law  of  England 
*'  knows  nothing  at  all  of  this ;  it  refts  not  this  power  ^ 
*'  which  it  commits  to  it's  Bifhops,  upon  any  fuch 
*'  lineal  Juccejfion  or  defcent  (which  if  knows  to  be 
*'  a  rope  of  land,  a  ridiculous  chimera,  a  thing 
*'  which  no  man  upon  earth  is  able  to  make  out.) 
*'  No  ;  but  it  confiders  the  King,  vefted  (by  a6t 
*'  of  Parliament,  or  the  fuffrage  of  the  peoplej  with 
*' a  FULLNESS  of  ALL  power  ecclefiafiical  in  theie 
*'  realms,  as  i'mpowering  and  authcrifing  Bifhops  to 
*'  ordain".  *  I  fhall  fubjoin  here,  fhould  this  power 
of  ordination,  which  has  been  delegated  to  Bifhops 
in  England,  be  delegated,  by  the  King  and  Par- 
liament, to  Prefbyters  in  the  Colonies,  they 
•would  have  as  much  authority,  as  officers  in  the 
Church  of  England,  to  ordain  here^  as  Bifhops  have 
at  home  \  and  any  upon  whom  they  fhould  confer 
holy  orders  would  be  as  authentic  miniflers  of  this 
Church,  and  their  adminiflrations  in  it  as  valid,  as  if 
they  had  beenordained  by  the  laying  on  of  the  hands 
of  any  Bifhop,  or  all  the  Bifhops,  in  England.  I 
would  fay  yet  farther,  fuch  a  conflitution  would 
much  better  fuit  the  flate  of  the  Colonies,  than  the 
mifTion  of  Bifhops  •,  and  for  the  fame  prudential 
reafons  that  governing  and  ordaining  power  was 
veiled  in  Bifhops,  at  home,  upon  the  fettlement  of 
the  Church  after  the  reformation,  it  might  be 
veiled  in  Prefbyters  in  this  new  world.  And  fuch 
a  delegation  of  power  would,  I  will  venture  to  fay, 
be  far  more  reafonable,  than  the  mifTion  of  Bifhops 
to  the  Colonies  that  "  fhall  have  no  authority  over 
the   Laity"  of  the    Epifcopal    Churches.     Such 

Bifhops 

*  DifTcnt,  Gcmlcman's  anfwcr,  toWhite*  pag.  203,  205* 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anf\5r'ered.     i6i 

Bifhops  are  unknown  to  the  Church  of  England, 
and  to  all  antiquity.  They  are,  in  truth,  a  thiug 
quite  new  under  the  fun. 

What  Dr.  Mayhew  has  wrote,  in  oppofitinn  to 
the  propoled  Plan  for  an  American  Epiiccpate,  is 
as  follows.  * 

"  The  gentleman,  I  muft  own,  has,  in  his 
fcheiTie,  fee  this  propoial  for  American  biQiops  in 
a  more  p!aufible,  and  leis  exceptionable  point  oF 
view,  than  I  have  feen  it  placed  in  before. — But  he 
is  not  known  •,  nor  has  he  informed  us,  upon  what 
ground  or  authority  he  goes,  in  giving  this  account: 
of  the  matter.  The  declaration  of  an  anonymous 
writer,  how  confidently  foever  he  may  exprtls  him- 
felf,  is  not,  furely,  fuffi<:ient  to  fatibfy  us,  that  this 
is  the  true  fcheme  planned.  How  much  regard 
foever  he  might  jutlly  claim,  if  he  were  known  to 
be  a  perfon  of  that  eminence  and  dignity,  which 
fome  of  his  eKprefllons  inrirriate  him  to  be;  yet 
while  this  is  unknowh,he  will  excufe  us  if  we  do  not 
intirely  rely  upon  his  word,  that  no  other  fcheme 
has  been  propofed.  This  may  pofTibly  be  only  his 
own  fcheme,  the  fcheme  of  a  private  man  :  And, 
till  it  comes  from  better  authority,  or  in  a  more 
authentic  way,  we  may  confider  it  as  an  irhaginary 
one,  calculated  to  ferve  a  prefent  turn,  or  to  lull 
us  into  fecurity  as  to  bifhops  here,  till,  by  the  real^ 
and  much  more/^^/^/ fchcme's  bring  carried  into 
execution,  it  is  too  late  to  remonftrate. 

W  But 

*  Vid.  his  remarks  on  an  anonymous  tra£)-,  entitled  an 
anfwer  to  Dr.  Mayhew's  obfervations  on  the  charter 
and  condudl  of  the  Society  for  the  propagation  of  the 
Gofpel  in  foreign  parts,  pag.  59,  and  onwards. 


t62    The  Appeal  to  tlie  Public  anfvvered 

But  let  us  for  the  prefent  take  it  for  granted, 
that  this  gentleman's  is  the  real  and  only  fcheme. 
Let  us  fuppofe,  that  bifhops  are  to  be  at  fir  ft  fent 
to  America  with  fuch  limited  powers,  to  refide  in 
cpifcopal  colonies,  and  to  have  no  concern,  but 
with  epricopalians.  Have  we  fufficient  ground  to 
think  that  they  and  their  fuccefTors  would,  to  the 
day  of  doom,  or  for  a  long  time,  remain  contented 
with  fuch  powers,  or  under  fuch  limitations  ?  in  a 
word,  that  they  would  continue  fuch  inofFcnfivCj, 
harmlefs  creatures,  as  this  gentleman  fuppofes  ; 
only  diffufing  bleffings  around  them,  on  all  manner 
of  people  fujceftible  of  fuch  holy  imprefficns  as  are 
made  by  their  hands  on  the  good  people  in  Eng- 
land ;  fo  that  we  can  reafonably  apprehend  no  mif- 
chief  from  them  ?  Has  this  order  of  men  been 
remarkable  for  a  quiet,  ii^offenfive  behaviour  ? 
Have  they  ufually  been  free  from  ambitious  views 
and  prcjedts  ?  from  a  diipofition  to  intermeddle 
in  fecular,  worldly  matters,  and  to  enlarge  the 
fphere  of  their  domination? — from  attempts  to  en- 
croach upon  the  rights  of  mankind,  religious  or 
civil  ?  from  intriguing  with  princes,  or  the  gover- 
nors of  countries,  for  their  own  advantage  ?  from 
lending  their  affiftance,  and  joining  with  them,  in 
carrying  on  fchemes  of  oppreflion  ?  Is  it  natural 
to  fuppofe,  that  American  bifhops  would  long  con- 
tent themfelves  in  a  condiiion  lo  inferior  to  that  of 
their  brethren,  the  fuccejfors  of  the  apoftles  in  Eng- 
land ? — wirhout  any  of  their  temporal  power  and 
grandeur,  fo  as,  in  the  eyes  of  moft  people,  to  ap- 
pear of  a  lower  order  ;  and  confcquently  wanting 
thatauthorityand  refpedl  which, it  might  be  pleaded, 
is  needful  ?  Ambition  and  avarice  never  want  plau- 
fible  pretexts  to  accomplilh  their  end.  The  gen- 
tleman fays,  he  cannot  perceive  why  the  people, 

even 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered.     163 

^ven  of  New-England,  '  might  not  as  fafely  hreath 

*  the  fame  air  with  a  bifhop,  as  their  brethren  in 
*01d  England  do.  .  However  (as   he  goes  on)  we 

*  are  unwilling  to  difquiet  any  of  them,  by  import- 

*  ing  and  fettling  amongft  them  a  creature,  which  it 
.'  feems  fome  of  them  account  to  be  fo  noxious, 
.*  Only   we   hope,    that    his  occafionally  travelling 

*  through  the  country^  cannot  infe5i  it  very  danger- 
.^  oufly  *.'  One,  of  fuch  a  difpofition  as  he  pro- 
-pofes,  might  not.  But  what  if,  inltead  of  this,  he 
fhould  be  another  ^^fi'^^^r^/  ?  no  impoffible  fuppo- 
fition  !  And  fuch  a  man  would  probably  be  the 
mod  acceptable  to  the  major  pare  of  the  epifcopal 
clergy,  if  not  of  the  laity,  in  New-England. 
Might  not  He  be  a  very  noxious  creature,  iftfe^  'he 
country  in  travelling  through  it,  and  ^xQuk plagues 
inftead  o{  hlejfings^  in  his  progrefs  ?  What  the  gen- 
tleman fays  upon  this  head,  brings  to  my  mind 
what  I  have  read  of  that  great  church-man  :  '  When 

*  the    Jpiritual  hydra   began   to    belch    forth    his 

*  poifon^  when  the — prieft  went  his  progrefs,  the  air 

*  was  corrupted',  with  his  breathy  and  the  fell  cent  a- 
^  gion  fpread  itfclf  far  and  near.  The  Jnakes  which 
'  had  laid  long  in  the  grafs,  began  to  fhow  their 
'  heads,  and  hils  •,  they  Jiung  many  and  did  much 
f  inif chiefs  &c,    f 

I  AM  very  remote  from  fufpe6ling,  that  this 
gentleman  would  think  fuch  a  perfon  a  proper  one 
for  a  bifhop  in  America,  or  any  where  clfe  ;  (ince 
he  appears  to  be  of  a  very  different  fpirit  himfelf. 
And  it  is  intimated  by  him,  that  we  fhall  have  no 
ground  for  apprehenhons,  fince  biftiops  here,  if 
any  there  are,  will  be  appointed  by  the  crown,  and 

W   2  in  lire]  ^' 

f  P.  66.        t  ^  TracT;  intltled  Prif/Iianifj^  ^Q, 


164    The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered* 

intirely  dependent  on  the  government  in  England  ^ 
that  thefmalleii  attempts  towards  an  oppr^ejjive  tnlarge- 
nient  of  fpiritual  power  would  he  mmediately  crujhed 
with  indigfiation  by  the  legijlature  there  ;    and  that 
both  the  moderation  of  the  clergy^  and  the  zvatchfulnefs 
of  the  laity  over  them  [God  be  thanked,  if  it  be  io] 
nre    much   more    likely    to   increafe   than,^  diminifb^, 
Thefe  are  good  iwords,  and  fair  fpeeches  ^   ngr  do 
I  doubt,  but  that  the  gentleman  fpeai^s    his  real 
ientiments.     But   fuppofing   all    this  ;   taking    it 
alfo  for  granted,  that  in  the  prefeyit  adminijlration^ 
there  has  been  a  dilcovery  of  lo  much  wifdom  and 
integrity,  of  fuch  a  great  regard  to  the  liberties  2^nd 
priviledges  of  the  fubje6t,  and,  particularly,  o^ fuch 
a  tender  concern  for  the  inter efi  and  prcfperiiy  of  his 
Majejiy^s  .imerican  colonies^  as  leaves  us  no  room  to 
fear  an  oppreffive  enlargement  of  fpiritual^  or  any  other 
-power^  during  the  continuance  of  it  :    All  this  be- 
ing taken  for  granted,  yet  may  not  times  alter,  and 
adminillrations  change  I    Who  knows   what   the 
next  reign  and  ?d,minifl:rarion  may  be  ?  or  whether 
acrempts    towards    an  oppreffive   enlargement  of 
power,    may  not  be  as  much   encouraged,    as  it  is 
ilippofed  they  v/oulJ  be   frowned   on,   during    the 
prefent  ?    We  are  certainly  much  m.ore    fecure  a- 
gainft  fuch  opprcffion,   in  the  abfence  of  bilhops, 
than  we  fhould  be  if  they    were  fixed  here.      Otfta 
principiis,    was    never    thought  an   ill    maxim    by 
wife    men.     Biiliops  being  once  fixed  in  America, 
pretexts  might  eafily  be  tound,  both  for  ertcreafing 
their  number,    and  enlarging  their  powers  :     And 
thefe  pretexts  might  probably  be  hearkened  to,  and 
prevail,  on  fuch  a  change  of  times  as  may  be  fup- 
pofed.     To  fay  the  lealt,  this  is  m^uch  more  to    be 
apprehended,  than  it  is,  that,  on  fuch  a  change,  bi- 

Ihopa 
*  P.  65. 


The  Appeal  to  the  PubUc  anfwered,     i6^ 

fhops  (hould  be  Tent  hirlier  at  firft  with  fuch  op- 
prtifiive  powers,  or  powers  that  interfere  with  the 
prefent  rights.and  privileges  of  the  C6>/£?»//?j.  Peo- 
ple are  not  ufualiy  depqved  of  their  liberties  all  at 
once,  bm  gradually  ;  by  one  encroachment  after 
another,  as  tt  is  found  they  are  difpofei  to  hear  them  \ 
and  things  of  the  moft  fatal  tendency  arc  often  in- 
troduced at  firft,  under  a  comparatively  plaufible 
and  harmlefs  appearance.  It  cannot  therefore  be 
thought  ftrange,  if  we  like  the  aforefaid  maxim,  as 
to  oppofing  the  firft  attempts^  in  the  prefent  cafe  ; 
and  are  defirous  to  keep  the  apprehended  evil  at  as 
great  a  diftance  as  may  be.  All  prudent  men  a61: 
upon  the  fame  principle  :  Nor  can  1  bring  myfelf 
to  reafon  as  he  did, who  {2^\<\JVhat  hath pofterity  done 
for  us^  that  we  fhould  be  concerned  for  pofterity  ?  And 
Ihould  biihops  be  once  fixed  here,  to  me  it  is  high- 
ly probable,  that  our  pofterity  would  not  find  it  half 
fo  difficult  as  this  gentleman  thinks  it  is  for  us  now, 
before  the  experiment  is  made,  to  anfwer  his  fpi- 
rited  demands,  '  Where  are  the  perfecutors  ?  Where 
'  is  the  dragca*  ?'  Efpecially  if  it  be  true,  as  many 
affirm,  that  high-church  tory  principles  and  maxims 
are  lately  revived  \n  England-,  and  favoured  ^r^^/- 
ly  by  fome,  whofe  influence  may  go  far  towards 
bringing  them  into  as  much  reputationjas  they  have 
been  in  difgrace  fince  the  death  of  Queen  /Inne. 

The  gentleman  confiders  as  perfedly  chimerical, 
the  apprehenfions  which  I  formerly  hinted,  refped- 
ing  the  inconveniences  that  might  refult  from  the 
appointm^^nt  of  bifhops  in  America.  Particularly, 
that  by  the  incrcafe  of  the  epifcopal  parry,  they 
might  get  a  majority  in  our  houles  of  ^alTembly  ; 
that  in  confequence  thereof  the  church  of  England 


t  P-  65, 


might 


j66    The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered. 

might  become  the  eftablifhed  religion  of  all  thefe 
colonies  ^  that  a  facramental  left,  or  lomething  like 
it,  might  enfue,  to  exclude  non-conformifts  from 
places,  preferment,  and  civil  offices  as  in  England -^ 
and  that  taxes  might  be  impofcd  on  us  airin  com- 
inon,  for  the  maintenance  of  thefe  bifliops,  and 
the  epifcopal  clergy.  1  did  not,  however,  imagine 
that  thefe  dangers  were  very  near  ax  hand  inNew^ 
England  3  nor  do  (o  now,  confidering  the  fmall 
proportion  that  epifcopalians  bear  to  proteftants  ^o{ 
other  denominations.  Should  bifliops  be  fent,  and 
the  Society  bend  its  whole  force  to  increafe  the 
church  among  us,  it  is  not  probable  that  thefe  e- 
vents  would  fpsedily  take  place.  But  even  remote 
evils  may  be  reafonably  apprehended,  as  well  as 
thofe  which  are  imminent  •,  and  are  to  be  guarded 
againd,  as  much  as  may  be.  That  appointing  bi- 
fliops for  America,  would  be  a  probable  means  of 
increafing  the  epifcopal  party  here,  will  not  be  de- 
nied. This  is  doubtlels  one  principal  reafon,  why 
it  is  fo  much  defired  ;  tho'  neither  this  gentleman, 
HOT  the  Society,  fo  far  as  1  can  at  prefenc  recollect, 
has  particularly  mentioned  it.  There  is  how- 
ever, fomething  which  looks  a  liitle  this  way 
in  the  Abftrail  before-cited,  wherein  the  rea- 
fons  for  bifliops  here  are  enumerated;  one 
of  which    is,    '  to    confirm    new    converts    from 

*  fcbifm  *.'     But  even    fuppofing   a    majority    of 
epifcopalians    in   the  legiflative  body,  in  any  [/ 
wufl  not  Jay  either,  becaufe  there  are  more  than  two] 
of  thefe    colonies,    the    girntleman    afks,    '   Why 

*  fhould  a  tefl:  law  follow  ?   Is  there  any   fuch  law 

*  in  the  epifcopal  colonies  ^  Or  even  though  there 

*  were,  can  it    be   imagined,  that    if  a  prevailing 

*  party   in   New-England  were   wild  enough   to  ^ 

propofe, 
*  Jbjiraify  1715.  p.  54* 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered.     167 

^  propofe,  his  Majefty,  would  ever  be  advifed  to 
*  pafs  one  for  that  purpoie  *  ?*  Whether  there  is 
any  iuch  law  already  in  any  "of  the  epifcopal  colo- 
nies, is  with  me  a  doubt.  But  by  what  I  haveob- 
ferved  of  the  over-bearing  fpirit  of  epifcopalians 
among  us,  it  is  ftrange  to  me  if  there  is  not.  The 
very  Candid  Examiner  of  my  Obfervations^  plainly 
enough  intimated  his  defire  of  fuch  a  law  here. 
And  if  there  were  a  confiderable  majority' of  epif- 
copalians in  the  legiflature,  with  a  zealous,  not  to 
fay  bigotted  and  opprejfive  epifcopalian  Governour 
at  their  head,  and  bifhops  in  thefe  parts  to  coun- 
tenance and  forward  {o  pious  a  Ichc-me  for  edifying 
the  church  •,  I  make  no  doubr,  but  that  the 
church  of  England  would  foon  be  eftablifhed  here 
by  a  provincial  law,  and  a  teft-a6t  fpeedily  pafTed. 
Nor  am  I  able  to  fee  any  ground  for  the  gentle- 
man's great  confidence,  that  the  King  would  noc 
be  advifed  to  allow  that  teft  ;  feeing  there  is  fuch 
a  one  in  our  mother-country.  I  prefume,  the 
gentleman  could  afTign  no  folid  reafon  for  a  teft- 
lavv  in  England,  by  -^Kxch  proteiiant  diflenters  are 
excluded  from  offices  there,  which  would  not  hold 
good  in  favour  of  a  law  of  the  fame  tenor  here  ;  I 
mean  on  the  fuppofuion  of  fuch  an  increafe  and 
majority  of  the  epifcopal  party.  Can  what  is  fup- 
pofed  reafonable  and  equitable  in  Old  England, 
be  fuppofed  unreafonable  and  injurious  in  New  ? 
Or  is  it  to  be  imagined,  that  the  Head  of  the 
church  of  England  would,  at  the  defire  of  the 
legiflative  body  in  any  of  his  colonies,  refufe  to 
allow  of  laws  for  eftabli(hing  that  church  therein, 
and  for  introducing  a  teft  ?  lav^s  manifeftly  adapted 
to  the  worldly  grandeur,  if  not  to  the  fpiritual 
good  of  that  church,  which  is  as  it  were  his  body  -, 

and 
?  P.  63. 


1(58     The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered." 

and  to  bring  in,  if  not  to  convince  fchifmatics  ?  If 
the  gentleman  was  able,  I  could  v/ifh  he  had  done 
Ibmething  mor£  tpward  removing  our  apprehen- 
fions  in  this  refped,  than  to  treat  them  with  Icorn  ; 
which  is  not  the  moil  likely  method  to  convince 
thofe  thrat  think  calmly  of  the  matter. 

He  treats  as  ftill  more  wild  and  chimerical,  the 
fuppofifion  of  our  ever  being  taxed  in  common, 
for  the  fupport  of  biiliops  and  their  clergy.  Sa^s 
he,  '  The  terror  of  being  taxed  for  bilhops,  &c. — 
*  is  yet  mere  chimerical  than  the  former*.'  But  in 
cafe  of  fuch  an  increafe  of  the  epifcopal  party,  of 
the  government's  coming  into  their  hands,  and  of 
the  church  of  England's  being  here  eftablifheci  by 
a  provincial  law,  which  things  mud  be  prefup- 
pofed  ;  where  is  the  abfurdity  of  fuch  an  apprehen- 
lion  ?  I  can  fee  none,  except  it  lies  in  the  injurious 
and  opprejfive  nature  of  fuch  a  fuppofed  tax  :  But 
this  confideration  will  never  prevent  the  doubts 
and  fears  of  thofe,  who  reflect;  on  what  has  been 
done  in  almoft  every  age  and  country  in  chriften- 
dom,  by  the  prevailing  religious  party,  for  their 
own  eafe,  and  the  further  weakening  and  vexing 
the    minority.      The    gentleman    obferves,   that 

*  tithes  are  paid  in  England  to  the  clergy  by  virtue 

*  of  grants,  which  laid  that  burthen  upon  eftates 

*  many  ages  before  the  prefent  pofTefTors  enjoyed 

*  them  -f.'  i.  e.  in  the  days  of  popery.  He  alfo  ex- 
prefTes  himfelf  very  pofitively,  that  if  this  had  not 
been  done,  an  ad  of  parliament  could  not  now  be 
obtained,  of  this  or  the  like  nature^  by  which  dijfenters 
in  common  with  others,  fhould  be  taxed  for  the 
maintenance  of  the  hierarchy.  And  having,  for 
ought  I  can  fee,  merely  by  his  per emptorinefs,  com- 

pleated  > 
!  P.  63,       t  Ibid. 


^lie  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwerei     1% 

pleated  his  viAory  in  this  refpecl,  he  irhme^idtei^ 
begins  his  triumph,  by  faying  :  '  With  what  rfio-- 
^  defty  theq  can  the  Dodor  lugged,  that  lucfi  a 
^  thiftg  might  be  Feared  in  New-Enghnd  *  ?*  I 
am  very  glad  if  the  governing  parr  of  the  natiurl 
have  fo  much  moderation  refpeding  prorcftant 
difTenters,  that  fuch  an  a6t  could  not  now  be  obtam- 
ied  there  ;  which  might,  ds  it  appears  to  me,  ht 
juftly  looked  on  as  a  great  hardfhip,  or  ihlfance 
of  oppreflion.  It  may  naturally  be  fuppofed; 
this  gentleman  is  of  the  farrie  opinion  :  Why 
clfe  could  not  kn  a6t  of  that  nature  be  now 
obtained,  if  the  hierarchy  were  ^not  already  pro- 
vided for,  by  virtue  of  grants,  when  t^opery  was 
triumphant,  which  laid  the  burthen  of  tythes  on 
eftates  ?  But  I  do  not  pretend  to  have  a  thorough 
underflanding  of  the  doSirine  of  tythes,  as  profejfed 
and  preached  in  the  church  of  England  ;  nevc^ 
having  rnade  this  any,  much  lefs  a  principal  part  o£ 
my  Jtudy^  however  important  an  article  it  may  be. 

Be  this  matter  as  it  may,  while  there  is  a  law  ini 
forcv!;  which  bears  fo  hard  on  proteftant  difienters^ 
as  the  teft  does,  I  fhall  not  eafi'y  be  perfwaded^ 
that  it  would  be  impofTible  if  the  hierarchy  was 
iipt  already  provided  for,  to  obtain  an  ad  for  that 
purpofe,  by  which  the  burthen  fHould  be  laid  up- 
on diiTenters  in  common  with  others  5  which,  iii 
fome  refpedls,  might  be  thought  a  lefs  grievance 
than  the  other  :  Particularly  as  it  would  be  much 
lefs  reproachfid  and  ignominious  x.o  them,  to  be  only 
obliged  to  pay  to  the  fupport  of  a  clergy  difapprov- 
ed  by  them,  than  to  be  treated  as  if  they  did  not 
merit  the  charadter,  and  were  therefore  unworthy 
tt>  enjoy  the  privileges  of  Britifh  fubjedi  j  thougli 
X  it 

t  P.  64, 


lyo    The  Appeal  ot  Putheblic  anfvvereci 

it  is  well  known,  his  Majefty,  whom  God  preferve, 
has  none  more  loyal  and  fait  hfuU 

But  to  return.    If  bifhops  are  fent  to  America,' 
they  muft  be  well  fupported  ;  this  is  beyond  doubt. 
By  whom  ?  or  by  what  means  ?  1  fuppofe  there  is 
not  yet  a  fund  provided  by  legacies,  near  adequate 
to  the  fupport  of  one  ;  it  not  being  a  jmall  matter^ 
that  fuHices   fuch  dignified  and  apojlolical  p'erfons. 
The   Society    will   probably  think,   this  burthen 
fhould  not  lie  upon  them  ;  as  they  are  not  able  t6 
fupport  afufficientnumber  of  miflions  among  peo- 
pkjwhofe  nectiTities  are  great  and  urgent.    Is  it  like- 
ly then,  that  theBritilh  nation,  fo  deeply  plunged  iri 
debt,  and  in  which  there  is  fcarce  a  poffibility  of 
laying  any  new  taxes,  will  undertake   to  maintain 
bifhops  for  America  ?  No  furely.    Will  the  bifhops 
and  rich  clergy  in  England  do  it  out  of  their  abun- 
dance  ?  This  is  at  leaft  as  improbable  ;    efpccially 
fmce  it  is  luppofed,  that  many  of  them  cannot,  to 
this  day,  be  intlrely  perfwaded,  but  that  it  is  rather 
more  bleffed  to  receive  than  to  gfve.     Will  American 
bifhops  then,   truft  to  the  generdfiry  of  the  p^i^iple 
here  ;  depending  upon  providence  and  alms,  or,  in 
■pther^ words,  upon  the  good  will  of  the  Americans  ? 
Will  they  be  content  without  reaping  any  other 
carnal  things  here,  than  what  the  people  may  judge 
ah  adequare  recompe.nce  for   the  fpiritual   things 
fown  by  them  •,  particularly,   fince  bifliops  feldomi 
preachy   for  confirming  weak  brethren^   and  for  thofe 
kciy  imprejficns  made  by  their  hands ^    on  all  manner 
€f  people  jufcepfible  thereof  ?    If  this  is  all,  or  the 
principal  pan  of  what  they  receive,    their  mainte- 
nance will  not  probably  half  jatisfy  them  ;  except 
perhaps  at  firft,  while  wonderful  effedls  are  exped:-  " 
ed  from  their  bleffmg^  and  the  benign  influence  of  their 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  aniwered.     171 

fun5iion.     Nor  will  they  run  the  rifque,  unlefs  they 
have  more  faith  in  God,  and  lefs  \ovtx.oi\\t  world, 
than  moft  of  their  order  have  had,  fince  Conltantine 
the  Great  became  a  nurjing  father  to  the  church, 
and  The  pious   maternal  council  ot  I^ice  iuckled  her 
wrh  the  clear  and  pure,  the  uncorrupc  and  '  finc.re 
milk'   of  Homooufianity-^    that    fhe   might    '  grow, 
thereby.'     Can  there  then  be  a  more  probable  lup- 
polition    than  this  ;    that  in   confequence    of  the 
epifcop  il     party's    increaling  in    thefe    colonies, 
and   becoming  a  majority  in  the  legiflatures,  the 
church   of  England   would  be  eftablifhedlDy  pro- 
vincial laws,  and  the  people  in  common  taxed  for 
the  fupport  of  bilhops  and  their  clergy  ?  Have  we 
reafon  to  think  that,  from   brotherly  affedlion  and 
tendernefs,  for  fchifmaticks,   they  would  exempt 
them  from  bearing  a  part  of  this  burthen  ?  I  wifli 
there  was  not  more  reafon  to  apprehend,  that  they 
would  oblige  non-conformifts  to  bear  a  double  pro- 
portion of  it  ;  not,  to  be  fure,  out  of  any  enmity, 
but  only  as  an  inftance  o^  wholejdme  feverity^  and  a 
probable  means  of  bringing  them  into  the  bofom 
of  the  church,  to  their  eternal  falvation — However, 
if  a  law  for  an  equal  tax  upon  conform! fts  and  non- 
conformilts  were  paded  in  any  Britifli  colony,  for 
the  purpofe  aforefaid,   there  is  fcarce  any  room  to 
doubr,    but    that   it  would  be  confirmed   by    the 
crown  :  The  Head  mud  take  care  for  the  good  of 
the  body,  and  all  its  members.     Nay,    if  bifiiops. 
were    fpfredily  to  be  fent  to  America,   it  feems  not 
wholly  improbable,  from  what  we  hear  of  the  un- 
ufual,  tenor  of  lome   late   parliamentary  a6ts  and 
bilk,  for  raifing  money  on  the  poor  colonies  with- 
cut  their  confent,  that  provifion  might  be  made  foe 
the  fupport  of  thefe  bilhops,  if  not  of  all  the  church' 
clergy  aifo,  in  the  fame  way, 

X  2  Thi, 


r^j^^    ^he  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwereci 

TpE  gentleman  having  endeavoured  to  expofe 
to  ridicule  the  ^forefaid  apprehenfions,  as  perfedbly 
ihimerical^  and  called  rny  modefiy  as  well  as  under- 
ftanding  in  gueftion,  even  foe  hinting  them,  im.- 
nsediately  adds,  '  Befides,  would  it  have  been  a 
^^  good  realon  at  the  revolution^  for  debating  the 
•  ^iffenters  from  the  full  exercife  of  their  church 
\  government  and  worfhip,  that  if  they  obtained  ir, 
*^,  tney  n;ight  perhaps  iocreafe  til)  they  got  2i  major 
"^^vote  in  both  houles,  and  then  enadl  r^o  mortal 
"^^  k,nDws' What  •^^.'  Thsfe  cafes,  \x  is  conceived,  are 
much  too  diffimilar  to  argue  thus  from  one  to  th^ 
otberi  '  The  church  of  England  had  an  exclufive 
legal  eilsbii  hment,  ar  the  time  fpoken  of-,  the  King 
for  her'fiead,  and  (worn  Proredor,  and  a  lino  ft  all 
perfqn^  of  in-ercft  and  power  for  her  members. 
Corfgripicy  wag  alm.(.ft,  if  not  the  only  path  to  pre- 
ferrnent^'  civil  honours,  offices  and  emoluments. 
In  (hort,  the  conftirution  both  m  church  and  flate 
was  fo  fecured,  ip'guarded  boih  by  lawi  and  mem- 
BerSs  and  non-conformifts  were  fo  few,  and  under 
fuch  difadvantages,  that  there  was  not  room  for 
any  fei^f  that  thty  would  ever  increafe  fp  as  to  be- 
come the  major  and.  leadipg  part  in  parliament,  or 
pe  able,  if  they  defired/ir.,  to  over-tgrn  the  eflab- 
riijimenr,  and'opprefs  epilcopalians.  Apprehenfi- 
oris  of  this  fort,  would  indeed^  have  been  perfectly 
<fto;;^r7V<;?(ar  that'clme  ;  efpecially  confidering  the 
diioniori  of  non- conform ifts  am.03;ig  themlelves, 
aiicf'  the  moral  impolTihiliry  of  th^ir  uniting, 
in'eftabiijhing  any  other  particular  form  of  church 
gcy^r.^ment/'*  What  parity  ?  what  (imilitude  js 
t^ere^bawee^  the  circumftances  of  New-Eng- 
^nd  aod  Old,  in  thcfe  refpeds  ?  1  he  cafe? 
4re  fo,  widelj  diKirentj  tha^  it  is  (l range  a 
'''    "^^ ''        "       '  geptlemaa 


^he  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered.     173 

genrleman  of  fo  much  penetration  and  acumen 
ftijuld,  by  his  manner  of  reafoning,  fuppofe  them 
jjarallel  We  have  no  fucb  ecclefiaftical  eftablifh- 
xnent,  as  that  of  England  -,  and,  I  hope,  never  (halL 
bur  churches  have  no  royalHead  andProiedlor,  in 
the  fenfe  which  that  has  •, — only  One  in  heaven^ 
whom  we  pray  to  be  x.\\tProte5for  of  the  other.  We 
^re  I  ot  an  independent  people,  or  fovereign  (late, 
but  depjjdent  on  England,  wherein  epifcopacy  is 
cftabhfhed,  and  which  we  honor  and  obey,  as  ouc 
inother-counrry.  Our  Governor  and  all  provin- 
cial Governors  appointed  by  the  crown,  I  fuppofe 
are,  and  by  law  mud  be,  conformifts  to  the  church 
of  England.  A  con  fide  r  able  number  of  perfons, 
even  in  the  N.  England  colonies,  are  perfons  of 
much  wealth,  influence  and  power.  In  mufl:  of  |;he 
colonies  the  rtfpe(!:tive  Governors  have  all  military- 
offices  at  their  free  dlfpofal,  and  the  nomination  to 
civil  -,  and  in  fome,  a  negative  on  the  choice  of  coun- 
fellors.  They  mud  alfo  be  fupp  >fed,  as  a  thing 
of  courfe,  mod  to  favour  epifcopalians  ;  fo  thac 
conformity,  inftead  of  being  a  bar  to  preferment 
here,  is  perhaps  generally  found  the  readied  way  to 
it.  Epifcopalians  may  be,  and  often  are,  chofen 
members  of  both  houfes  of  aflembly  in  th.e  colo- 
nies of  New-England  ;  nor  is  thtre  either  law,  or 
a,ny  thing  elfe,  to  prevent  this,  if,  by  their  qualifi- 
cations and  good  behaviour,  they  can  recommend 
themfelves  to  the  eledors.  And  I  hope  this  gen- 
tleman  would  not  have  the  people  obliged  by  law  to 
chufe  them,  whether  they  approve  of  them  or  not ; 
though  this  feems  to  be  the  amount  of  what  he 
fqmewhere  fays.  Befides,  the  epifcopalians  here 
are  more  united  among  themfelves  than  we  are, 
being  of  different  {t6k.%  and  parties.  And  diould 
tiiey  [the   epifcopalians]  hereafter    approach  any 

thing 


174    '^he  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered 

thing  near. to  an  equality  with  lis  in  pbirit  6f  num- 
ber, [hey  will  have  the  advantage  greatly  in  this 
refped  ;  fince  they  may  more  eafily  unite  their 
Hrength,  in  purfuing  meafures  for  their  feparate 
advantage,  and  to  our  common  detriment,  thati 
we  {ball  ours,  in  any  particular  methods  of  oppo- 
fition  to  them  :  So  that  they  may  carry  their 
paints,  even  with  inferior  numbers  \  efpecially: 
being  moft  favoured  by  an  epifcopal  Governor,' 
whole  influence  is  ordinarily  very  great  out  of  courts 
as  well  as  his  proper  conftitutionai  power  in  it. 

Our  circumflances  being  fuch,  is  there  not  ^ 
hundred,  a  thoufand  times,  more  reafon  to  appre-^ 
hend  that  epifcopalians  may  in  time  become  the 
major  and  governing  party  here,  and  ena&:  fuch 
laws  as  I  have  been  fpeaking  bf,  than  there  was 
at  the  revolution^  that  the  no^-conformifts  in  Eng- 
land might  do  the  like  there  ?  lean  hardly  think 
that  the  gentleman,  upon  a  little  refiei^iion,  will 
difown  it.  Which  being  the  cafe,  the  grand  prin- 
cipal on  which  he  fets  out,  in  (peaking  of  Ameri- 
can bifhops,  is  not  applicable  to  the  flare  of  tbefe 
colonies  ;  at  leaft,  no:  by  far,  very  far,  fo  applica- 
ble as  it  was  and  is  to  that  of  Enaland.  The  prin- 
ciple 1  intend,  is  this  :  That '  all  members  of  every 

*  church  are,  according  ro  the  principles  of  liberty, 

*  intitled  to  every  part  <Vf  what  they  conceive  to  be 
'  the  benefits  of  it,  inrire   and  complear,  fo  f^jr  /is 

*  ccnff^s  with  the  ivefare.  of  civil  governi^ieni*.'  Jt 
IS  readily  owned,  that  our  apprenenfion  of  v/hat 
may  pofTibly  or  probably  be  the  confeqnence  of 
bifliops  being  fent  hither,  ought  not  to  put  us  on 
infringing  the  reli^iious liberty  of  our  fellow  lub- 
jcdts,  and  chrifiian  brethren^   it  they    vyill    pardoq, 

'this^ 


T'he  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered.      175 

this  freedom  :  Neither  have  we  any  power  to  do 
fo,  if  w.e  were  unreafonable  and  wicked  enough  to 
to  defire  it  ;  our  charter  granting  fuch  liberty  to 
all  prote[iants.  But  the  epilcopalians  here  may 
enjoy  this  liberty,  as  they  now  do,  without  bifhops 
in  America,  though  under  fome  inconveniences; 
principally  perhaps,  for  want  of  hdy  imprejfions 
tnade  by  their  hands  in  the  ceremony  of  confirma- 
tion ;  their  lack  of  which  it  mull  be  owned,  is 
fometimes  but  too  vifible  in  their  behaviour.  We 
are  therefore,  methinks,  very  excufable,  if  we 
exprefs  a  reluctance  at  the  propofal  of  a  fcheme, 
which  we  really  apprehend  may  bring  great  trou- 
ble and  temporal  inconveniences  upon  us  ;  and  be 
the  fource  0^  much  divifion5difcord  and  confufion  : 
Efpecially,  if  it  be  alfo  a  fcheme  tending  to.  pro- 
mote that  particular  made  or  profeflion  of  chrifti- 
anity  among  us,  which  we  cannot  but  think,  on  the 
whole,  much  lefs  conformable  to  the  gofpel,  and 
therefore  lels  conducive  to  the  eternal  happinefs 
of  mankind,  than  that  which  at  prcfent  generally^ 
prevails  among  us. 

But  one  thing  nientioned  by  this  gentleman,  irt 
order  to  reconcile  us  to  this  fcheme,  had  almoft 
efcaped  me.  Jt  is  this.  *  Popijh  hijhops  re  fide  here^ 
fays  he, '  and  go  about  to  exercife  every  part  oi  i\itvc 
function,  without  offence  and  without  obfervati- 
on  *.'  But  this  has  a  much  lefs  tendency  to  re- 
concile us  )to  the  propofal  about  i^merican  bifhops, 
than  to  give  us  an  alarm  for  the  welfare  of  our 
mother  country  ;  with  which,  we  are  very  fenfible, 
our  own  is  connected.  If  popifh  bifhops  exercife 
their  fundion  inEngland  without  obfervationy  2ls  the 
gentleman  fays,  it  is  not   indeed  ftrange,  if  they 

do 

*  P.  66. 


ty'5    The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfweredl^ 

do  it  alfo  without   offence.     But  I   cannot   readiljr 
comprehend  what  he  means  by  faying,   that  thejr 
do  this  without  obfervattoh^  when  at  the  fame   lime 
he  fpeaks  of  it  as   a  notorious  fad  :   Though  hl^ 
meaning  cannot  be  mirtaken,  when  he  fays,    this 
is  done  without  offence.     It  mud  be,  that   it  gives 
ho  confiderable  umbrage  or  jealouly,  but  that  the 
people,  at  lead  thofe  of  higher  rank^  arie  contented 
it  lliould  be  fo.     For  he  fpeaks  of  this  as  an  in- 
ftance  and  proof  of  the   mutual  candor,  forbear- 
ance and  moderation,  which  prevail    at  this   day 
in  Englarid,  among  chriftians  of  different  denomi- 
narions  ;    and  foj  as  a  reafon   why    we  fhould  be 
well  fatisfyed  with  having  bilhopsof  the  church  of 
England  in  thcfe  parts.     But  if  this   proves  any 
thing,  it  proves  tob  much  •,  viz,    that  we  fhould 
be  content  to  fee,   not  only  Englifh,   but  PopifH 
bilhops, freely  exertifing  their  functions  among  us  j 
the  latter  of  which  is  not  agreeable  to  our  charter 
and  laws.     And  though  Hrti  a  warm  friend  to  re- 
ligious liberty  in  the  largfeft  fenfe  ;  and  tho'  mutual 
forbearance  cannot  be   too  much  recommended^ 
where  the  differences  are  merely  of  a  religious  u2LiuTt, 
or  fuch  as  do  not  afieft  the  liberty,fafery  and  natural 
rights  of  mankind  ;  yet  1  rhuft  own,  I  hope  never 
to  fee  popilh  bifhops  thus  going  about  without  of- 
jence.,  in  New-England  ;  bemg  perfwaded,   froni 
the  very  nature  of  divers  popifh  tenets,  that  roman 
catholics  cannot  he  Jafely  tolerated  in  the  free  ex- 
ercife  of  their  religion,  in  a  proteftant  government. 

I  HAVE  freely  explained  myfelf  as  to  the  pro- 
pofition    concernmg   bifhops    in   America  •,    and 
though  not  fo  fully,  yet  more  particularly  than  I . 
intended  to  do  •,  having  been  almoft  compelled  to 
it,  ac  once  by  this  genileman's  formal  attack  upon 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfW^cred.     tff 

k  few  exprefTions,  which  occafionally  dropped  ffom 
my  pen,  and  by  his  great  coLirtefy  in  attempting 
to  propofe  my  obje(5tions  diftinBly  for  me,  bccaufe 
he  thought  I  was  a  great  deal  too  vehement  to  do  it 
itiyfelf.  By  what  has  now  been  faid,  he  may  per- 
ceive, at  lead  that  he  has  not  wholly  diffipated 
'  the  poor  man's  fears  *,'  either  by  his  reafoning 
qr  rallying  on  the  fubjed:..  I  have  attended  to  his 
ferious  requeft,at  the  cohclufion  of  hisArgUrhent— 
'  if  he  \s  ftill  dijfatisfisd,  1,  intreac  him   to  confider, 

*  for    all  men   ought,  what  manner  of  fpirit  he  ik 

*  c/t*'  Still  DISSATISFIED  1  am-,  and^  I  hope, 
from  fuch  2i  fpirit  as  he  will  not  wholly  difapprove, 
however  wrorig  he  may  think  rhy  opinkns  :— -from 
a  love  to  iruth,  cultivated  in  my  early  days  ;  frorri 
a  love  to  what  I  take  to  be  the  mofi  primitive  chrif-^ 
tianity  ;  from  a  fincere  concern  for  the  welfare  of  my, 
country  \  and  an  apprehenfion  that  this  Icheme  of 
bilhops,  if  put  m  execution,  will  be  greatly  detri- 
mental to  it,  both  in  civil  and  religious  refpeds. 
This,  1  think,  is  the/^/r/V^fiom  which  my  diffaiii* 
faSlion  chitfly  arifes.  The  gentleman  has  doubt- 
Tefs  well  confidered,  frdm  what  fpirit  it  is-,  that  he 
is  fo  muchfet  upon  thisfcheme  ofbifhops  \  and  it  woulcj 
be  very  uncharitable  irt  ttie,  to  conclude  ir  a  bad 
one ;  as  I  do  not,  whatever  I  rhay  thi].k  of  the 
fcheme  itfelf.  However;  I  think  it  but  juftice  to 
him  to  acknowledge,  that  if  fuch  a  fcheme  as  he 
has  propofcd  were  to  be  put  in  execution^  and 
Cnly  fuch  confequences  were  to  follow,  as  he  pro-- 
feffedly  has  in  view,  as  the  ends  aimed  at,  I  could 
not  objefl  againit  it  -,  except  only  upon  the  fame 
principle,  that  I  ob]s:6t  againft  the  church  of  Eng- 
land in  general,  arid  Qlould  be  forry,  from  a  regard 
to  What  i  fuppofe  a  more  fcripiufal  way  of  wOrfiiipi 

Y  t^ 

*  P.  64.  t  P.  67. 


178     The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered. 

to  fee  that  church  prevail  here  t  Which  yet,  I 
folemnly  declare,  I  would  not  prevent,  though  it 
•were  abiolutely  in  my  own  power,  by  any  methods 
inconfiilent  with  that  full,  entire  liberty  in  religi- 
ous matters,  which  1  defire  for  mylelt ;  and  which 
all  men,  whofe  principles  or  pradtices  are  not  incon^ 
fiftent  with  the  fafety  of  Society,  have  a  right  to 
enjoy.  Thus  far  I  have  the  honor  fully  to  agree 
with  this  gentleman"*     Thus  Dr.  May  hew. 

It  is  evident,  by  this  time,  that  "  objedllons  can 
be  offered  againft  fuch  a  plan"  as  has  been  pro- 
poled.  Whether  the  Dr.  or  ihofe  who  employed 
him  to  write,  will  elteem  them  "  reafonable",  time 
inay  difcover.  We  have  this  opinion  of  them  ^ 
and  are  perfuaded,  that  no  "  management",  how- 
ever "  artful  and  dexterous",  will  be  fufficient  to 
make  them  appear  otherwife  to  thofe,  who  will 
jugde  impartially. 

Had  the  Dr.  after  he  had  opened  the  plan  for  the 
intended  Epifcopate,  pointed  out  particularly  it's 
reafonablenefs  in  itrelf,it's  confiftency  with  the  cftab- 
lifhment  at  home,  and  the  RicHxEpifcopalians  have 
to  fuch  a  conflicution  in  the  Colonies,  he  had  done 
fomething  to  good  purpofe  ;  bur,  inftead  of  this^ 
be  appears  in  the  guife  of  a  confefTor,  and  gravely 
afks,  "  what  reafonable  objedions  can  be  offtred 
againd  fuch  a  plan  as  this,  fo  univerfally  harmlefs 
in  every  refped  ? — Can  any  thing  be  promoted  by 
it,  but  the  good  of  the  Church  ?  Can  any  thing 
be  objefted  againft  it,  but  that  this  will  be  pre- 
vented ?  Will  any  dare,  in  this  age  of  Brit ifh  free- 
dom, to  avow  the  objedlion  ?  Would  not  fuch  a 
bare-fac'd  attempt,  thus  wantonly  to  opprefs  us, 
and  prevent  our  enjoyment  of  thofe  invaluable 
rights    to  which  we  are  equally  entitled   with  o- 

thers,— 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered.     179 

thers, — roufc  the  indignation  of  all  the  friends  of 
religious  liberty,  whether  C  hurch-men,  or  DiTen- 
ters'*  ?  What  could  the  Dr.  aim  at  by  thefe  ex- 
potlulatory  queries,  unlefs  to  work  upon  the 
paQions  of  the  vulgar  ?  Surely,  be  could  not  ima- 
gine, that  any  man  of.  good  underitanding  would 
be  otherwife  moved  by  them,  than  to  wonder  he 
ihould  only  harangue,  when  \i  was  his  bgfincls  to 
^rgue. 

He  goes  on  with  placing  again  before  our  view 
the  bugbear  of  perfecution.  If  they  cannot  have  an 
Epifcopate,  they  are  punifhed  ;  and  to  be  punifhed 
for  their  religious  principles  is  perfecution  in  the 
ftrideft  fenfe.  Says  he,  "  will  it  be  faid,  that  the 
prevention  of  an  Epifcopate  in  America  is  no  pu- 
nifhment  ?  It  may  as  well  be  faid,  that  keeping  a 
man  out  of  kis  right  is  no  injuftice'*.  The  Co- 
ionifts  then,  who  worfhip  God  according  to  the 
mode  of  the  Church  of  England,  have  a  right  to 
an  Epifcopate  ;  and  to  prevent  their  enjoyment  of 
this  '*•  invaluable  right"  is  to  punifh  them,  and 
thus  to  punifh  che:Ti  is,  in  "  the  properelt  fenfe"^ 
to  perfecute  them.  Let  me  make  a  paufe  here, 
and  afic,  on  what  do  they  found  this  pretended 
RIGHT  ?  How  came  they  by  it  ?  Should  it  be  faid^ 
we  claim  liberty  of  conlcience,  and  fuliy  enjoy  it. 
And  why  would  we  confine  this  privilege  to  our- 
felvcs  ?  Is  it  not  as  reafonable,  Epifcopalians  Ihould 
both  claim  and  enjoy  it  ?.  It  is  readily  allowed  ;  and 
we  are  as  willing  they  fhould  poflefs  and  exercife 
relii<io.us  liberty  in  it's  full  extent,  as  we  defirc  to 
da  it  ourfclves.  Bat  then,  let  it  be  heedfully 
minded,  we  cL^m  no  right  to  defire  the  inter- 
pofition  of  the  state  to  esablish  that  mode  of 
worOiip,  governoienr,  or  dikipliaej  we  apprehend 
¥2  IS 


|80    The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered. 

3s  moft  agreable  to  the  mind  of  Chrift,     We  de- 
fire  no  other  liberty,  than  to  be  left  unreftrained 
in  the  exercife  of  our  religious  principles,  in  fo  far 
as  we  are  good  members  of  fociety.     And  we  are 
perfedlly  willing  Epifcopalians   ftiould  enjoy   this 
liberty  to  the  full.     If  they  think  Bifliops,  in  their 
appropriated  fcnfe,  were  conflifuted   by  Chrift,  or 
his  apoftles,  we  objed   not  a  word   againft   theic 
having  as  many  of  them  as  they  pleafe,  if  they  will 
be  content  to  have  them  with  authority  altoge- 
ther derived  from  Chrift.     But  they  both  claim 
and  defire,  a  great  deal  more.     They  want  to    be 
diiiirguifhed  by  having  giilicps  upon   the  footing 
of  a  State-establishment.     Was  this  a  right 
the  apoftles  claimed,  or  any  of  their  fuccefTors  in 
%hc  uhcjcrrupt  ages  ef  the  Church  i  Is  this  a  right 
that  Chrift  has  vcfied  in  any  prcfeffors  of  his   reli- 
gion, much  lefs   m  fome,  as   contra-diftinguifhed 
from  ethers  f  If  Epifcopalians  have  a  right  to  a 
civil-eftabhfliment  in  their  favor,  the  other  deno^ 
^pinations  in  the  Colonies  have,  in  true  reason, 
as  good  a  right  ;  and   may,  wuh  as  much  juftice, 
^omplain  ol  perfecuiion,  if  it  is   not  granted  to 
them.     The  plain  truth  is,  by  the  Goipel-charter 
all  n  pfeffed  chriftians  are  vefted  with  precifely  the 
fame  rights  y  nor  has  one  denomination  any  more 
a  right  to  the  interpofuion  of  the  civil  magidrate, 
in  their  favor,  than   another  •,  and   wherever  this 
difference  takes  place,  it  is  befide  ihe  rule  of  scr  ip- 
Ti)R^,  and,  I  may  fay  alio,  the  genuine  didates  of 
VNcoRRuPTBD  REASON.     If  Epifcopalians  would 
?eft  fatisfied,  as  the  othtr  denominations  do,  with 
^hat  rhey  apprehend  to  bd  purely   scriptural 
IDiniilcrs,  they  would  be  perfectly  upon  a  par  with 
theri^^,  as  to  the  enjoyment  of  religious   liberty   in 
U's  fuUeft^xH-ni  :  B\n^  n  ihej?  mvlt  have  vvhat 

they 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered.     i8i 

they  call  thefe  fcriptural  miniflers  upon  a  State- 
establishment,  they  can  have  no  realbn  to  cotn- 
plain,  unlefs  of  themfelves,  if  they  do  not  enjoy 
that  liberty  which  others  do  \  not  becaufe  they  ar<; 
more  favored  or  diftinguifhed,  but  becaufe  they 
claim  no  other  religious  liberty,  than  what  is  grant- 
ed in  the  Gofpel-charter.  The  fhort  of  the  matter 
is,  if  the  Epifcopalians  in  the  Colonies  are  perfe- 
cuted,  while  they  cannot  obtain  fuch  an  Epifcopatc 
as  they  defire,  their  own  defires  are  their  only 
perfecutors  ;  unlefs  they  will  fay  they  are  perfc- 
cuted  by  the  King,  or  Parliament,  or  both, 
to  whom  folely  it  belongs  to  give  them  what  they 
defire  :  And  if  they  fhould  not  be  pleafed  to  do 
this,  ir  may  be  juftiy  "  doubted",  as  they  are  cer- 
tainly "  armed  with  power",  whether  they  would 
be  *'  difpofed  to  bring  them  to  the  ftake,  or 
gibbet". 

If  it  is  the  truth  of  fafl,  that  the  late  Dr.  Samuel 
Chandler  "  gave  his  confent  to,  and  approbation 
of,  American  B.fhops,  in  the  manner  they  hava 
been  rtqiiefted",  we  very  much  wonder  at  it  •,  and 
can  no  otherwife  account  for  it  than  by  fuppofing, 
that  he  was  either  too  complaifanc  to  fome  high 
dignitary  of  the  Church,  or  did  not  fo  carefully 
attend  to  the  true  merits  of  the  cafe  as  he  would 
have  done,  had  he  himfelf,or  the  dilTcnters  at  home, 
been  more  immediately  concerned  in  it. 

Who  thofe  "  fome''  are  *'  that  would  freely 
join  wiih  the  Epifcopalians  in  their  application  for 
Bifhops,  if  their  alTiftance  was  needed,  we  know  not; 
but  we  know  of  numbers  of  theChurch  of  England, 
of  good  fenfe  and  great  integrity,  who  are  as  truly 
hearty,  as  any  among  uSj  in  their  wilhes,  that  they 

may 


1 82     The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered. 

may  never  fee  Bifhops  in  America  ;  as  firmly  be- 
lieving it  would  be  a  dilTervlce,  initead  of  advan- 
tage, to  the  intereft  of  religion,  confidering  thQ 
circumilances  of  the  Colonies. 

The   Dr.  has  nothing  farther  to  fay,   in   this 
fedion,  but  to  tell  us   how,  *'  by  calling  his  eyes, 
while  writing,  upon  the  public  paper   of  the  day, 
he  was  (truck  with  a  paragraph,  faid  to  be  an  an- 
fwcr  from  the  King  of  Poland,  to  the  Emprefs  of 
Ruflia",  and   by  making  lome  remarks   upon   it. 
But  wc  are  unable,  notwithftanding  what   he  has 
offered,  to  perceive  it's   pertinency  w  the  prefenc 
difpute.     We  find  no  fault  v/ith  the  King  of   Po- 
land  for  "  binding  himfelf  by   oath   to  maintain 
and  defend  the  popifh  religion,  as  it  was  the  reli- 
gion of  thofe  with  whom  it  lay  to  make  him  King  ^ 
but   we  think,  at  the   fame  time,  he    was    highly 
bJamable,  (hould  it  be  fuppofed  he  really  believed 
this  to  be  the  true  religion,  to  promife  upon  oath, 
that,  inftead  of  defending,    he  >vouId   perfecutc 
thofe  in    the  Kingdom  who    v^^ere  proteiiants    by 
principle.     Far  from  applarding   his   condvict,  we 
have  no  other  opinion  of  him,  m  conlequence   of 
it,  than  of  Saul,  who,  undcT  ihe  falfe  perlbaficrj  cf 
doing  God    good    fervlce,    madly    perrecuted   the 
dilciples  of  Chrifl.      And  the  belt  excufe  that  can 
he  made  for  him  is  that,  which  this  Saul,  when  he 
came  to  himfelf,  made  in  his  ov^n  behalf,  namely, 
*••  that   he  d\d    it    ignor^intly*'  •,    notwichilanding 
which,  he  calls  himfcll-  ''  the  chief  of  finneri,",  for 
his  former   folly.     We  do  not   believe,  that   the 
King  of  Poland,  or  any  other  King  »on   the  earth, 
has  a  right,  eiiher  from  his  oath,  or  any  other  way, 
to  perfecute  his  fubjeds  for  their  relit^lo.us  princi- 
ples :  On  the   contrary,  wc   are  fully   periuaded, 

ihu 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered.     183 

that  he  ought,  (o  far  as  the  fafery  of  the  Govern- 
ment will  allow  of  it,  to  protecl  them  all,  without 
difcrimination,  in  that  way  of  Wvorfhipp'ng  God, 
they  think  will  be  mod  acceptabk  to  hi.n.  We 
defire  no  favor  in  this  kind,  in  diftindion  from 
the  Eplfcopalians  ;  neither  ought  they  to  defire 
any  in  diftinction  from  us.  If  they  have  a  right, 
upon  the  foot  o^ Jcripture  or  reafon^  to  defire  Bi- 
fhops  upon  a  State- establishment  in  order 
to  the  exercife  of  their  religious  principles,  we 
have  as  good  a  right  to  defire  Paftors,  in  the  fame 
way,  for  the  exercife  of  our's  ;  but  as  we  do  not 
defire  this  for  ourfelves,  they  cannot  reafonably 
complain  if  we  do  not  defire  it  foj  them. 


4^fy^^^^^'^-^^4^^*^^^4^^^j^^^^^^^^ 


ANSWER 


ANSWER  to  Section  IX.  which  pre- 
tends that  the  Epifcopate  propored  cannon 
hurt  the  DifTenters,  and  is  fi:et  from  all  re^- 
fonable  Obje(^tions, 


c^^o$oo^o^:^^c^(^c^CK^c$oo5o<^o§3^c^  c$b 


THE  Dr.  begins  this  fedion  with  faying, 
"  fhould  it  be  pretended,  that  an  American 
Epifcopate  would  be  produdive  of  much  clamor 
and  difconrent  in  the  Colonies,  it  would  be  an  ill- 
grounded  affertion".  We  are  of  a  quite  different 
mind  ^  as  knowing  it  Would  be  the  occafion  of 
great  uneafinefs  to  multitudes.  But  fays  the  Dr. 
arguing  upon  the  fuppofuion  that  it  would  be 
produftive  of  difcontenr,  "why  the  uneafinefs 
of  the  members  of  the  Church,  fo  juftly  founded^ 
deferves  not  to  be  confidered  as  much  as  the  un- 
eafinefs of  it's  enemies,  without  any  foundation^  will 
be  difficult  to  fhew".  It  would  be  difficult 
upon  his  reprefcntation  of  the  cafe.  But,  by  only 
rcverfing  it,  and  hereby  exhibiting  it's  true  ftate, 
the  difficulty  at  once  vanifhes.  Epifcopalians,  as 
we  judge,  have  no  right,  in  virtue  of  the  GofpeU 
charter,  or  any  other,  to  a  State-establish- 
ment of  Epifcopacy  in  the  Colonies  ;  and  if  they 
are  uneafie  for  want  of  it,  their  uneafinefs  is  "  with- 
out  any  juft  foundation'*  :  Whereas,  if  they  are 

diftinguiflied 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  antweted     iSj 

diftinguifhed  from  the  other  denominatiorlf!;  Hf  ihe 
grant  of  fuch  an  eftahlifhment,  thele  deuominiti- 
ons  would  have  "  juft  rf-afon''  for  ureafiDi^Jo  oii  ac- 
count of  this  difcrmininng  difference. —  T\h-  iug- 
geition  that  follow.,  n-m^ly,  "  that  difco.i'en  id 
the  minds  ot  Ciiurch-m-r.!  wvjild  noc  havt-  i.hac 
dangerous  tendency  wufi  rr'pcd  to  the  govern- 
ment, which  there  ;s  reason  to  apDrehend  ^.-f  ir  id 
the  minis  of  others",  is  ar  '  ncr  bile  jnd  unjuit. 
If  he  does  not  know  it,  v/e  do,  char,  there  rave 
been  in  tiie  boibm  of  rhe  Church  ot  England,  id 
ihis  Country,  red  h')t  Jacobites,  who  woulJ  gladly 
have  overthrown  the  prcf^  t  eflabliOiment  of  the 
Crown,  had  it  been  in  rheii  powef  •,  and  if  there 
are  any  luch  Jicobices  in  thr  Ccljoles  aL  prefenr, 
they  belong  to  that  denomimtion  only  in  whofe 
'*  minds  f here  is  no  dangerous  difconient",  unlefs 
it  be  fuppoltd  there  rrijy  be  fuch  among  ihc  Ro- 
man-catholics. 

- .   '  -  '    '  -      } 

The  Dr.  having  offered   thefe  few  hint?,  iipod 

fuppofuion  that  the  miffion  of  Biiliops   woulJ    be 

attended  with  difcontent,  now  goes  nn  r.^  fay,  "  of 

any  confiderable  difcontent  or  uneafincfs  ther-   is 

no   reafon   to   be   apprehenfive".     And  why  ?    It 

follows,  "  difTenters  in  this  Country  have,   of  late 

years,  greatly  come  off  from  their  pfejudice.*?  ;  -and 

fenriments  of  candor  and  moderation  have   vifibiy 

taken  place.     And,   excepting  here   and    there  a 

hot-heated  writer— we  would   hope  of  the  diffen- 

ters  in  America,  that  they  bear    no  ill-will  to  the 

Church,  and  defire  nothing  more  than  lecu.'ity  in 

the  enjoyment  of  their  prefc  n:  advantages''.     How 

does  this    agree   with  a  paffage,   in   the  petition^ 

which  was  fent  to  the  Univerfity  of  Cambridge,  by 

the  Dr.  and.the  convened  body  who  put  him  up'd 

Z  ^filing  ? 


1156     The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anf<verea, 

■writing  ?  In  this  petifion,  fpraking  of"  the  diflen- 
ters  of  ^.11  denominations",  they  lay,  "  fuch  is  the 
UNEASINESS  not  to  fay  perverseness  of  their 
difpofition,  that  they  are  not  contented  quietly  to 
partake  thefe  immenfe  privileges,  but  make  it  their 

CONSTANT    PRACTICE   tO  TRADUCE   and    VILIFIE 

the  Church,  not  even  refraining  from,  the  State 
under  which  fuch  imimunities  are  allowed  them". 
It  is  not  poffible  there  fhould  have  been  this  mod 
apnareht  inconfiflency  between  their  appeal  and 
petition^  if  they  had  both  been  wrote  under  the  in- 
fluence o\  "  fimplicity  and  godly  finceriry",  with- 
out the  mixture  of  "•  worldly  wifdom".  Infallibly, 
the  accbunt  in  the  appeal  is  wrong,  if  that  in  the 
petition  ib  right,  and  vice-verfa  5  for  they  dirediy 
Conrradidl  each  other. 

The  Dr.  goes  en,  '*  as  to  other  denominationsg 
the  fubje6l  has  been  propoied  to  fome  of  the  moft 
fenfible  of  them,  who  have,  with  great  candor, 
confeffed,  that,  as  fuch  an  Epifcopate  as  has  been 
requefted,  could  have  no  ill  effedl  upon  any,  they 
had  no  objedions  to  offer".  We  lay,  on  the  other 
hand,  the  miffion  of  Bifhops,  upon  the  propofed 
plan,  has  been  mentioned  to  Epifcopalians  ;  and 
fome  of  the  mod  folid,  judicious,  and  wife  among 
them,  have  freely  exprefied  their  difapprobarion  of 
the  things  confidering  the  date  and  circumftances 
of  the  Colonies,  and  as  freely  declared  their  wifhes 
it  might  not  come  into  event. 

It  is  farther  faid,  to  (hew  there  could  be  no  rea- 
fon  for  difcontent,  that  "  the  Englifh  Bifhops  have, 
for  a  long  courfe  of  years,  exercifed  their  authority 
with  fo  much  mildnefs,  tenderneis  and  moderation, 
as  Icarcely  to  have  afforded  an  iiiftance  of  reafon- 

able 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfvveredl.      187 

able  complaint,  ^fpecially  to  diflenters!'.  Their 
tender ncfs  and  moderation  towards  the  Coloniils, 
that  are  Non-epifcopalians,  has  not  of  late  been 
remarkably  vifible,  fhould  this  have  been  the  caie 
in  regard  of  dificnters  at  home.  Had  they  been 
thus  mild,  it  would  have  been  much  to  the  advan- 
tage of  the  infidel-natives  here.  Many  of  thtm, 
by  this  time,  v^ould  probably  have  been  converted 
to  the  faith  of  Chrift,  in  confequence  of  the  opera- 
tion of  that  iNcoRPORATiNG-ACT,  which,  Under 
their  benign  influence,  as  we  believe,  was  rendered 
null  and  void  ;  and  for  no  other  reafon  than  this, 
that  he  work  of  gofpelifing  the  Indians  would  not 
be  carried  on  after  the  mone  of  the  Church  ofEng- 
land,  unlefs  Epifc'jpalians  had  a  hand  in  it,  I'o 
the  fame  miidnefs  and  rendernels  it  was  owinof,  that 
the  petition  of  the  Prefbyterian  Church  at  New- 
York  for  a  charter  from  the  King  met  with  the 
like  fare.  The  account,  aS/  tranlmirted  from  a 
Gcntieman  in  that  City,  is  this.  "  The  Church 
^'  (Prefbyttr/an)  of  New- York  lately  petitioned  the 
*'  King  for  a  Charter.  On,  the  26tb  of  Auguft  it 
"  was  rc]e6led.  The  ghbPvly  father  of  London 
*'  turned  follicitor  for  the  Bigots  here,  at  the  boar<i 
*'  of  trade.  It  was  fjggefted,  that  the  grant  of 
''  this  favo'-  would  be  a  breach  of  the  Coronation 
"  oath.  The  trade  v»rould  not  decide  upon  that 
*'  argument  -,  but  reported,  that  general  policy 
*'  was  againd  our  having  greater  privileges,  than 
*'  aie  allowed  by  the  laws  of  toleration.  We  were 
"  very  moderate  in  our  requeft.  It  was  only  to 
"  fecure  our  Church  from  falling  into  fecular  ufes, 
''  and  preferve  the  bones  and'graves  of  our  fathers 
''from  being  fold.  Hov/  hard  !  When  Vintners, 
*'  Sadkrs,  I'aylors,  &cc.  &c.  &c.  are  incorporated 
^'  Comoanies  in  London  for  lefs  honorable  endi>^! 
"■*'■-  Z  2  Is 


|88     The  Appeal  tQ  the?  'jpublic  anfvyered 

*'ls  this  the  moderation  of  the  Hierarchy"  !  If  let-    , 
ters,  from  Epilcopahans  here  of  private  charader,"-  1 
and  fmall  importance,  could,  by  being  handed  to" 
dignitaries  at  home,  i\vail  to  fuch  hurtful  purpofes, 
what  might  reaionably  be  expeded  as  the  effedl  of 
letters  from  a  Bifliop  in  tfie  Colonies  ! 

As  to  the  extrad  from  Calvin,  the  Dr.  muft 
have  inferted  it  rather  for  the  fake  of  his  name, 
which  he  knows  is  held  in  great  veneration  by 
many  in  the  Ccun-ry,  than  from  his  efteeming  him 
d  friend  to  flpifcopacy,  in  his  knfc  of  it.  He 
knows/or  rr.i^ht  eafily  have  known,  that  he  was 
jho  greater  a  irknd  to  it  than  we  ara.  He  has  in- 
deed been  often  traduced,  by  Epifcopal-v/riters,  as 
one  pf  the  greateit  enemies  of  iheChurch  of  Eng- 
land, ^  Says  pi.  Nichols,  befides  ethers  1  have  not 
i'oom  to  cire  from,  "  Mr.  Calvin,  in  his  letters  to 
fomeoi  his  friends,  made  uie  of  fome  very  hard 
expreffi  '.ns  with  relation  to  the  Church  of  Englands 
ivhich  did  not  i'o  well  become  rhe  m.outh  ot  a  di- 
•i'ine-^  */  The  plain  truth  is,  Calvin  was  in  prm- 
ciple  as  real  an  enemy  to  the  divine  right  of  Bi- 
fhopsj  asro  the  Qmnt  right  of  Fupes, 

The  Dr.  goes  on,  ^/  fome  formerly  had  an  a- 
'>i?erfion  to  the  idea  of  Bifhops  in  America,  on  the 
luppofition  that  they  mull  become  fubjtd  to  their 
avithoritv. "  But  tbe'p]an\vhich  is  now  hxed  mu(l 
effectually  obviate  all  their  objcclions,  and  difiBpate 
^heir  fears'",  "  It  has  been  largely  iKewn,  that  there 
are  cbji^iflioha  (\illj  and  jud  ground  for  fear  ;  and 
fuch  as  Epifcopalians  will  noi  fii  d  it  very  eafie  to 
is^ovc,li  is  addedj  *' ogr  ordinatiops  cannoc 
'■    '■    ''       ^''    '''  "'"'''  '   '  ■        '  .  hurt  , 

"^  Dtf-sice  ortbe  Doff,  sind  Difclpllneof  the  Qhurch  of 


^he  Appeal  to  the  Public  anlwered.     iSg 

hurt  them,  any  more  than  their  ordinations  can 
injure  us. — And  as  to  fuch  difcipline  and  govern- 
ment as  is  inte  ided  to  be  exercifsd  under  an  Epif- 
copace,  they  will  have  no  reafon  to  be  diflatisfied 
therewith,  any  more  than  yvG  now  have  to  be  difla^ 
tished  w:th  the  difcipline  exercifed  by  them".  The 
Dr.  quite  miftak.es  the  t  ue  ground  of  our  diflaiis- 
fadlion.  it  is  not  s|mply  the  ej^ercife  of  any  of 
their  religious  principles  that  would  give  the  leaft 
uneafinels,  nor  yet  the  exercife  of  them  under  as 
many  purkly  scriptural  Bifhops  as  they  could 
with  to  have  •,  but  thtir  having  Bifh  )ps  under  a 
State-estaslisHxMEnt  which  would  put  them 
upo.i  a  different  foot  from  the  other  denominati- 
ons, and,  without  all  doubt,  fooner  o^  later,  expofe 
Uhcm  to  many  difficukies,  and  grievous  hardihips. 

He  fays  farther,  "  we  fhould  have  many  reafons 
to  be  pleafed  with  an  Epifcopare",  and  mentions 
two  or  three  by  way  of  Ipecimen.  *'  Sometimes 
we  have  been  grieved  at  feeing  the  ill-behavjor  of 
a  Clergyman  in  the  orders  of  our  Church  ;  bur^ 
by  the  lettlement  of  Am.erican  Bifhops,  a  remedy 
will  be  provided  for  this  dilbrder'*.  They  have 
thi  remedy  already  provided  at  home  ;  and  yer, 
there  are  more  diforderiy  Clergy-men  therein  pro- 
portion, than  are  to  be  found  here.  And,  as  this 
is  certainly  the  truth  of  fad,  it  fhould  feem  better 
to  let  things  remain  as  they  are,  than  to  run  the 
venture  of  a  remedy,  which,  upon  long  tryal,  has 
been  found  not  to  anfwer  it's  intention.  "  Some- 
times we  have  lamented,  that  the  Bifhops  at  home,, 
and  the  Society  for  the  propagation  of  the  gofpel, 
have  been  impofed  upon  by  falfe  accounts  tranl- 
mitted  from  hence  by  our  American  Clergy  -,  but 
ynder  an  Epilcopate,  we  mud  be  fenfible  there 

can 


ipo     The  Appeal  to  the  Public  apfwered, 

can  be  no  opportunity  for  any  grofs  impofitions 
of  ^his  nature".  Ihere  has  been,  and  now  is,  op- 
portuniiy  fur  impofitions  in  this  kind  at  home^ 
v^here  ihcre  are  Bifhops  in  plenty  ;  and  there 
wnuld  be  much  more  opportunity  for  it  here^  as 
Bdiops  in  America  would  be  lo  valUy  diftant  frorn 
rnuit  of  the  Clergy  under  thtir  care.  It  would  be 
eafier  to  impofe  upon  them  by  wrong  accounts 
hete^  than  it  is  in  England.  "  Sometimes  again 
complaints  have  been  made,  that,  in  confequence 
cf  thisfalfe  information,  miffions  have  been  eredled 
in  improper  places,  and  (he  Society's  bounty  has 
been  milappli/d  -,  but  of  ail  iuch  cafes  Bdhops  in 
this  Couni;ry  will  be  competent  judges,  and  no 
p^  rv^erfion  or  abufe  of  the  Society's  favors  will  be 
luit'ered  to  conunue".  It  i>  nut  for  want  of  good 
information,  as  to  the  real  Hate  of  religion  in 
Norih  Carolina,  that  it  has  been  fo  long,  and  fo 
ftrangely  negle6i:ed  by  the  Society  ;  but  froo]  a 
prevailing  diipofirion  to  epifccpize  'the  m.ore  nor- 
thern Colonies.  And  ihould  this  be  in  the  view 
of  the  BiQiops  to  be  Tent,  as  many  improper 
millions,  in  obr  eftirnation,  might  be  ereded,  or 
encouraged,  as  there  are  now  ;  probably  a  great 
many  more.  We  are  firmly  perfuadcd,  this  v;culd 
rather  hurt  than  mend  the  matter. 

The  Dr.  concludes  this  fc6lion  with  renicving, 
as  he  calls  it,  "  the  frightful  obifdlion  of  <p  ritual 
courts"  ;  and  he  does  it  by  telling  us,  "  vv'e  may 
be  fure  no  fuch  courts  will  be  ereded".  This  is 
fully  fatisfying,  fo  far  as  wc  may  rely  on  his  word. 
He  feems  to  allow,  that  ','  fome  laws  which  retare 
to  thefe  courrs  may  bear  hard  upon  Britilli  liber- 
ty'' ;  but  ftys,  "  It  is  probable  that  the!-,  and  all 
oiher  Eccleiiailical  laws, 'as  weU  as  our   liturgy 

and 


•   The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered.     19  r 

and  public  offices,  and  olir  ^ranfiuion  of  the  Bible, 
will  be  reviewed  as  loon  as  ic  fnal]  b?  thought, 
that  there  is  good  fenle  and  candor  enough  in  the 
body  of  the  nation  to  adnfiic  of  it".  When  this 
happy  day  (hall. arrive,  it  will  be  time,  and  not 
before,  as  we  judge,  to  think  of  an  Epifcopate 
in  the  Colonies. 

The  next  fedlion  v^holly  relates  to  "  the  cafe 
of  Tythes"  ;  which,  as  it  has  no  immediate  con- 
nection with  the  prefent  fubjed,  and  would  re- 
quire a  great  deal  of  room  thorowly  to  difcufs,  I 
fhall  not  trouble  my  felf,  or  readers,  with  faying 
any  thing  upon  it  ;  but  proceed  to  that  which 
follows. 


Answer 


ANSWER  to  Section  XI.  entitled, 
farther  Sufpicions  and  Objeclions  obviated,  and 
the  Subject  concluded. 


c^^i:>!ipo^o^c^d^d$i(%id^c^d^^d^:^6^ 


THE  fird  objedlon  is  thus  e^prefTed,  "  it  maj 
be  inquired,  whether  new  laws  will  not  be 
made,  in  cafe  of  an  American- Epifcopate,  to  fub- 
jecl  us  to  the  payment  of  tythes"  ?  The  Dr.  an- 
fwers,  "  of  this  there  can  be  no  more  reafon  to  be 
apprehenfive,  than  if  Bifhops  were  not  to  be  fenc 
hither".  Very  true,  if  the  laws  of  England,  re- 
lating to  tythes,  fhould  not  be  interpreted  to  bind 
in  America,  or  no  enadting  claufe  {hould  be  added 
to  make  them  to  be  of  force  here  :  But  of  this 
there  might  be  *'  reafon  to  be  apprehenfive", 
through  the  influence  of  Bifhops  ;  efpecially,  if  the 
fupport  of  moft  of  the  Epifcopal  Clergy,  in  manjr 
of  the  Colonies,  lliould  continue  to  depend  on  the 
charity  of  benefadors  at  home,  as  would  probably 
be  the  cafe.  This  would  afford  a  plaufible  argu- 
ment to  fubje6l  the  Colonies  to  tbe  law  of  tythes  i 
and  no  man  living  can  fay,  they  would  not,  in 
time,  be  thus  fubjedled.  Without  all  doubt,  this 
law,  or  fome  other  lefs  offenfive  in  it's  found, 
would  take  place  here,  as  foon  as  the  (late  of  things 
would  allow  of  it.     The  Dr.  himlelf  has  incauti- 

oufly 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered;     193 

oufly  dropt  that,  which  naturally  leads  to  fuch  a 
thought,  under  the  next  objedion  he  mentions^ 
W'hich  is  ; 

"As  ignorance  is  ever  rufpicious,  it  may  be 
farther  afl^ed,  iliali  we  not  be  taxed  in  this  Coun- 
try for  the  iupport  of  Bifhops,  if  any  fhould  be 
appoinced"  ?  The  Dr.  anfwers  in  as  peremptory 
ternis,  as  if  he  had  btren  endowed  with  abfolute 
forefighc,  "  Not  at  b.\V\  And  yet,  he  immedi- 
^itely  adds,  "  But  (liould  a  general  tax  be  laid  up- 
*'  on  the  CcfuNTRY,  and  thereby  a  fum  be  raifed 
*'  fufficient  for  the  purpofe,— I  believe  fuch  a  tax 
*'  would  not  amount  to  more  than  four  p:f nee  on 
*'  one  hundred  pounds.  And  this  would  be  no 
"  mighty  hardfhip  upon  the  Country.  He  that 
*'  would  think  much  of  giving  the  Cm  thoufandth 
*'  part  of  his  income  to  any  ufe,  v/hich  the  Legilla- 
*^  ture  of  his  Country  fhould  aflign,  deierves  not 
*'  to  be  confidered  in  the  light  of  a  good  fubjed, 
"  or  member  of  fociety".  You  here  fee,  ye  Co- 
loniils,  the  opinion  of  the  Dr.  and,'  we  reafonably 
prefume,  of  the  Ep^fcopal-Clergy  under  whofe  di- 
redion  he  wrote,  that  the  Country  might,  ia 
equity,  be  taxed  for  the  fupport  of  BiOiops  ;  that 
it  would  be  "  no  mighty  hardfhip",  if  it  (liould  ; 
yea,  that  we  fliould  not  be  v/orthy  of  the  "  cha- 
radler  of  good  fubjeds,  if  we  thought  much  of  it". 
If  the  Country  might  be  thus  taxed,  the  tax 
might  be  laid  upon  thofe  Colonifts,  whofe  fore- 
fathers forfook  their  native  land,  wich  all  it's  ac- 
commodations and  comforts,  that  they  might  be 
freed  from  the  Epifcopal  yoke  of  bondage.  And 
fhall  it  be  declared,  in  [he  face  of  the  world,  that: 
this  would  be  "  no  hardlhip"  to  their  pofterity,  and 
Ihat  they  would  be  neither  good  fubjedls,  or  good 
A  a  members 


J 94     The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwerM. 

members  cf  focicty,  if  they  "  thought  much"  of 
fupporting  that  power  which  has  been,  and  may 
again  be,  terribly  opprelTive  ?  Would  this  give  no 
untafinefs  ?  Would  there  be  no  reafon  for  difcon- 
tent  ?  If  the  Country  might  be  taxed  four  pence 
in  one  hundred  pounds,  it  might,  for  the  fame  rea- 
fon, and  with  as  much  juftice,  if  it  was  thought 
the  fupport  of  Bifhops  called  for  it,  be  taxed  tour 
fliillings,  or  four  pounds  m  the  hundred,  and  fo  on 
to  ten  pounds,  until  the  tax  of  tythes  was  com- 
pletely faflened  on  us.  Surely  the  Dr.  was  off  his 
guard,  or  he  y/ould  not  have  given  us  juit  reafon 
to  fulpedl,  inilead  of  "  ignorantly  fufpt^ing",  that 
we  fliould  dtjirly  pay  fur  Bifnops,  if  they  were  lent 
to  America. 

Another  objedion  is,  "  that  if  Bifhops  are  fet- 
tled in  America,  although  in  the  manner  we  now 
propofe,  there  will  poflibly  be  an  augmentation  of 
their  power,  as  iocn  as  circumftances  will  admit 
of  it'*.  But,  fays  the  Dr.  "  at  this  rate  there  can 
'*  be  no  end  of  cbjeding.  For  if  every  pofTible  ill 
*•  efFed  of  a  thing,  proper  in  itfelf,  and  harmlefs 
"  in  it's  tendency,  may  be  made  an  argument  a- 
*'  gaind  it,  there  is  nothing  that  can  efcape.  Ar- 
*'  guments  of  this  fort  may  as  fairly  be  alleged  a- 
*'  gainfl:  a  religious  toleration, — againft  allowing  the 
*'  comm.on  pec^ple  the  ufe  of  the  holy  fcripture,  or 
"  the  liberty  of  examining  any  points  of  religion 
*<  or  government,  &c  •,  for  none  can  tell  what  ill 
*'  confequences  and  abufes  may  follow,  in  fome 
*'  future  period,  from  thefe  conceflions  and  indul- 
"  gences".  Enough,  1  iruft,  has  been  already 
faid  to  (liew,  that  the  propofcd  Epifcopate  is  neither 
''  proper  in  itfelt",  or  harmlels  in  it's  tendency"  j 
and  the  objedled  ^'  augmentation  of  power",  far 

frorh 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered.     195 

from  being  merely  possible,  is  in  an  high  de- 
gree probable.  Would  Bifhops  here  be  contented 
with  "  reftrained  powers^*  longer  than  they  could 
help  it  ?  Would  they  not  endeavour,  as  they  had 
opportunity,  and  circumftances  would  permit,  to  re- 
gain thofe  appendages  they  have  been  deprived  of? 
Would  they  be  eafie  until  they  were  upon  an  equal 
footing  with  their  brethren  of  the  fame  rank  and 
order  at  home  ?  Are  thefe  only  pofTibilities  ? 
May  they  not  rather  be  expeded  in  the  natural 
courfe  of  things  ?  Nay,  the  Dr.  himfelf  has  unwari- 
ly opened  the  workings  of  his  own  heart  upon  this 
head.  Says  he,  '*  fhould  the  government  fee  fit 
*'  hereafter  to  inveft  them  [Bifhops]  with  fome  de- 
*'  gree  of  civil  power,  worthy  of  their  acceptance, 
*'  which  it  is  ImpofTibie  ro  fay  they  will  not  ; — yet 
"  it  is  inconceivable,  that  any  would  therelDy  be 
*f  injured".  We  are  not  told,  what  degree  of  civil 
power  would  be  worthy  of  a  Biihop's  acceptance  ; 
but,  if  we  may  guefs  by  what  is  thought  worthy  an 
home,  it  cannot  well  be  fuppofed  to  be  any  thing 
fhorcof  the  fuper-intendency  of  two  or  three  Ame- 
rican-govcrnmencs.  It  may  eafily  be  conceived, 
vv'herein  this  m.ight  be  "  injurious",  at  leatl,  to 
fome.  And,  as  civil  power,  in  every  degree,  has 
in  fad  been  exercifed,  by  fome  or  other,  in  an  op- 
prelTive  arbitrary  manner,  we  are  even  necefTirated 
not  to  be  at  a  lofs  to  conceive,  how  this  might  be  the 
cafe,  was  this  kind  of  power,  in  whatever  degree, 
veiled  in  Bifliops.  The  Dr.  indeed  fays,  "^  it  is 
hoped,  that  our  Bifnops  will  always  be  thought 
to  dcferve  the  charader  of  being  podl-iTed  of  the 
greatcft  ability,  integr'ty,  and  pi-udence'*  >;  v/hich 
15  "  all  that  the  happinefs  and  fafetv  of  the  Public 
resjuire".  Bat  on  what  does  he  found  this  hope  ? 
Neither  Bifliops,  nor  any  othei  men  in  digniry  and 
A'  a  2    '     ■  jyowef 


Iji^     Thq  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwcred 

power,  have  always  been  remarkable  for  fupe- 
tlor  ability,  or  integrity,  or  prudence.  This  is  top 
much  to  be  expcdtd  in  iuch  a  world  as  our's.  Ic 
has  never  yet  been  the  cafe  in  any  age,  or  place^. 
And  fhoulcl  it  happen,  in  time  to  come,  that  Bi- 
Ihops  here  Ihoiild  be  not  only  wanting  in  thefe 
good  qualities,  but  pcfTelTed  of  the  contrary  ones, 
would  ic  be  at  all  difilcult  to  conceive  wherein^they 
might  be  injurious  ?  But  fuppofing  the  befl,  that 
ihty  were  always  the  men  that  have  been  de- 
Icribed,  would  it  be  no  hurt  to  the  Church  cf 
Chriil,  iliould  there  be  conjoined  with  their  fpiri- 
tual  powers,  tnofe  that  are  of  a  worldly  nature? 
Would  this  be  no  injury  to  the  fpecial  cbjeds  of 
their  care,  as  God's  minifters  in  his  kingdom  that 
is  not  of  this  \vorId  ?  Timothy  was,  in  the  Dr's 
opinion,  aBifliQpcf  the  higheft  order  in  theChurch  ; 
snd  what  were  the  fentiments  cf  the  infpired  Paul, 
relative  to  his  proper  work  as  fuch  ?  Says  he  to 
him,  '^.  ''  Thou  theiefoi-e-enduie  hardnels  as  a  gccd 
folciier  of  Jefus  Chrifl:.  No  man  (hat  warreth  en- 
i^angleth  himfcif  v/uh  tlve  affairs  of  this  life". 
:And  again,  j- *■  Mediate  orj  thefe  things,  give 
thy  felf  V/HOL^Y  to  them,  that  thy  profifing  m^ay 
sppea;  to  all'V  1  here  is,  in  the  nature  cf  the 
ahmg,  an  incongruity  in  vcfting  the  iame  perfons- 
with  fpiritual  and  civil  powera.  It  unavoidably 
tends  to  divide  theij. minds,  as  well  as  labors  ,  and 
is  much  more  adapted  to  do  hurt,  than  good. 
BiQiop  Latimer,  cne  of  the  firfb  reformers,  and  a 
blelTed  Martyr  for  ;he  dike  of  Chrift,  lias  e>pre{red 
iVis  fentimenrs  upon  this  head  very  juftly  and  flrik- 
ingly,  in  his  fermon  of  the  plough  ;  which  I  re- 
commuid  to  :hs  Di*s  ptrufal. 

I  HAVJ2 

%  2  Tim,  2.   g,  i  I  Tim.  4.   15. 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered.     197 

I  HAVE  now  takep  notice  of  what  he  has  reply'd 
to  '*  all  the  objections",  he  fays  "  have  been  made 
againlt  fending  Bifhops  to  America,  fo  far  as  has 
come  to  his  knowledge"  ^  and  I  willingly  leave  ic 
with  the  reader  to  judge,  whether,  inftead  of  having 
proved  them  to  be  "  unreafonahle  and  groundlefs", 
he  has  nor,  by  what  he  has  offered,  added  to  their 
real  ftrength,  rendering  them  more  difficult  to  be 
juftly  anfwered.  He  feems  to  think  it  "  poffible  o- 
ther  objedions  may  be  fuggefted" ;  and  herein  he 
{las  judged  right.  Such  objedions  have,  in  thefe 
papers,  been  placed  before  his  view,  not  as  "  in- 
vented by  dexterity,  or  ill-will",  but  as  naturally 
and  obvioufly  arifing  from  the  true  merits  of  the'- 
caufe  itfelf  :  Nor  do  \vc  think  they  are  capable  of 
being  refuted.  '^  Cavilers  and  Sophifts"  may  at- 
tempt their  refutation,  and,  by  the  help  of"  ieger- 
.demain",  they  may  poffibly  do  it  with  fome  "  ap- 
pearance of  plaufibility"  to  vulgar  eyes  ;  but 
Ihould  they  "  employ  their  talents  in  this  exer- 
clfe",  though  they  might  pleafe  themfelves,  as 
children  arc  diverted  while  "  engaged  in  crambo 
or  pufh-pin",  they  v/ould  neither  "  deferve  the 
public  attention",  or  impofe  upon  men  of  good 
underftanding,  and  folid  judgment. 

The  Dr.  concludes  his  fubjefl  with  a  few  mif- 
cellaneous  thoughts,  he  may  fuppofe  of  fome 
weight.  Says  he,  "  unlcfs  Biiliops  fhould  be  fpe- 
dily  lent,  we  can  forefee  nothing  but  the  ruin  of 
the  Church  in  this  Country".  So  far  as  it  is  a 
State-Church,  there  is  no  reafon  for  concern  a- 
bouc  it's  ruin.  Wherein  it  is  a  Church  having  no 
officers,  fuperior  or  inferior,  but  purely  scriptu- 
R  AL  ones,  and  v/alking  according  to  no  rule  but  thac 
ivhich'is  of  DIVINE  appointment,  it's  "ru:n"  can- 
.  no: 


19S     The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwercd. 

not  be  feared,  but  through  want  of  faith  in  the 
fuper-incendlng  government  of  the  great  "  Head 
over  all  things^.—Says  he,  "  the  Church  ot  Eng- 
land here  is  \o  efTentially  the  fame  with  the  Church 
at  home,  that  ic  muft  everfubfitl  or  perifh  by  the 
fame  means".  The  Church  of  England  at  home, 
and  here,  may  p.eriili  in  regard  of  a  i>TATE-KSTAB- 
L2SHMENT,  and  undoubtedly  wiil,  iooner  or  la- 
ter; but  fo  far  as  ic  is  a  Church,  built  on  ihe 
*'  foundation  of  the  Apodles",  Chrid  himlelf  being 
*^  the  chief  corner-ftone",  it  will  "  fubfift"  againll 
all  oppofition  of  earth  and  hell. —  Says  he,  "  1  he 
Church  here  has  been  long  ftrugglmg  under  fuch 
an  increafmg  load  of  difficulties,  and  is  now  in  fuch 
a  date  of  opprefTion,  as  to  deferve  the  compafiion 
of  the  whole  chnftian  world"''.  We  are  really  afto- 
niihed  at  this  hyperbolical  reprcfentation  ;  and  can 
no  otherwife  account  for,  or  excufe  it,  than  by  fup- 
pofing  that  theDi's  zeal  had,  at  this  time, depriv- 
ed him  of  all  fober  judgment.  — ■  Says  he,  *'  the 
author  need  not  ufe  many  words*  to  prove,  that 
confiderations,  even  of  a  political  nature,  are  fuffi- 
cient,  in  this  cafe,  to  prevail  with  thofe  who  are 
jnfenfible  to  other  motives".  Vv  hat  he  means  here 
is,  "  that  no  form  of  Ecclefiaftic.al  government  can 
fo  exactly  harmonile  with  a  mixed  monarchy  in  the 
ilate,  as  that  of  a  qualified  Epifcopacy".  But  it 
ought  to  be  remembered,  the  Dr's  Bifliops,  accord- 
ing to  his  own  account  of  them,  pag.  14,  15.  are 
ABSOLUTE  MoNARCHs  tn  the  Church;  and 
SUCH  muft  Kings  be  in  the  State  to  make  out 
a  proper  analogy.  Bifhops  there  have  b.en,  even 
in  Enghnd,  who,  in  their  own  imaginations,  were 
absolute  Monarchs  in  the  Church  ;  ?nd  they 
would  have  made  the  King  the  fame  absolute 
MoNARCiri  in  the  State,  to  the  dedrudion  of  that 

wifely 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anlwered.     199 

wifely  contrived  mixture  of  power,  which  gives 
the  Britifli-ilare-contVitution  chc  prerercr.ce  to  any 
on  the  whole  earih.  The  g  vrriimt-nt  of  tne 
Church,  by  the  Dr*s'  Bilhops,  is  moie  unlike  the 
gove;  nment  of  the  (late,  by  King,  Liids  and  Com- 
mons, than  any  form  of  government  in  the  ChuiChi 
that  was  ever  known  in  the  Colonies  ;  and,  per- 
haps, is  more  natorally  and  p-^werfuUy  adapted  to 
fubverc  it.— Says  he,  in  a  word  ro  '.hcfe  who  have 
been  averfe  to  American  Bdh  ps,  *'  the  fubjedt  is 
here  placed  in  it's  true  lighr.  and  thereby,  it  is 
trufted,  their  mifapprehenfions  are  fairly  removed^ 
and  confequent  fears  are  fhcwn  to  be  gioundlefs'^ 
As  the  Epiicopate  propofcd  is  not,  in  all  refpects, 
as  we  apprehended  it  might  be,  upon  it's  firtl  ap- 
pearance, io  far  our  concep'io'ns  are  redified  -,  but 
the  Dr.  is  much  millaken,  if  he  thinks,  ti-at  he  has 
removed  our  fears.  By  what  he  has  olfered,  efps- 
cially  in  anfwer  to  objedions,  inftead  of  Hie  wing 
that  they  are  ''  groundleis",  he  has  really  added 
flrength  to  the  reafons  on  which  they  v/ere  ground- 
ed. We  are,  from  him,  more  fatisfied  ihan  ever, 
that  an  Epifcopate  in  the  Colonies,  upon  the  pub- 
lished plan,  even  in  his  view  of  it's  operation,  will 
be  greatly  hurtful.  It  ought  not  therefore  to  be 
expeded,  though  we  call  oarfelves  *' friends  of 
truth,  juilice  and  liberty",  that  we  fhould  do  any* 
thing  to  help  forward  the  million  of  Biihops. — 
Says  he,  on  one  fuppofition,  in  order  to  point  ouc 
the  "  injuitice  and  cruelty"  of  endeavouring  tb 
prevent  the  Epifcopate  aflced  for,  "  If  all  the  re- 
ligious denominations  in  America,  by  the  general 
conftituiion  of  the  Britifh  Colonies,  are  to  be  treat- 
ed on  the  footing  of  a  perfect  equality,  for  which 
fome  have  contended  •,  then  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land is  as  fully  encicled  to  the  compleac  enjoy- 

menc 


200     The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwercd, 

ment  of  it's  own  difcipline  and  inftitutions,  as  any 
other  chridians".     Who  ever  objedled  againft  this 
*'  corhpleac  enjoyment",   upon  the  footing  of  a 
^'  perfed  equality*'  ?  The  "  other   chriftians"  do 
net  enjoy,  nor  do  they  defire  to  enjoy,  any  religi- 
ous   liberty   but    that    wherewith    Chrift,  without 
difcrimination,  has  n-sade  his  difciples  free  ;  and  if 
this  Is  not  enjoyed  by  Epifcopalians  "  as  compleat- 
ly'*,  as  by  the  other  denominations  in  the  Colonies, 
h   is  becaufe  they  want  to  be  upon  an   unequal 
FOOTING  with  their  neighbours  ;  that  is,  to  have 
Bifhops  that   are  more  than   meer  scriptural 
ones,  that  (hall  cxercife  their  authority  under  the 
patronage  of  a  State-establishment,  whereby 
they  would  be  diftinguifned  from,  and  kt  above,  all 
the  other  denominations  in  America  ;  which,  as  we 
are  venly  perfwaded,  would  be  putting  them  into 
circumftances,  they  have  no  right,  either  from  na- 
ture or  grace,   realon  or  revelation,  to  expctl  of 
defire.     If  they  have  fuch  right,  let  the  grant  of  it, 
as  made  to  them,  be  produced,  that  it's  authenticity 
may  be  fairly  examined  in  the  view  of  the  Public*  if 
they  have  not,  their  complaints  are  unreafonable.— 
Says  he,  in  fine,  on  another  fuppofition,  "  if  any 
denomination  is  entitled  to  a  iuperiority  above  o- 
thers,  as  is  believed  by  many  ;  rlien  the  claim  of  the 
Church  of  England  to  this  preference  is  not  to  be 
difputed".     We  difpiite  it  not  in  regard  of  Virgi- 
nia and  Maryland  ;  but  as  to  the  Colonies  north- 
ward of  thefe,  we  think,  the  preference,   in  point 
of  iuperiority,  if  fuch  preference  be  at  all  fuppofed, 
ought,  in  common  juftice,   to  be  given  to  them  \ 
not  only  as  they  are  more  than  thirty  times   more 
numerous  than  the  Epifcopalians,  but  as  they  have 
merited  diftinguifhing  favor,  fo  far  as  it  may  fea- 
lonably  be  bellowed,  in  virtue  of  the  vaft  expence 

of 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered.     201 

of  labor,  treafnre  and  blood,  their  fore-fathers,  ia 
fome  of  thefe  Colonies,  have  been  at,  to  extend  the 
Britifh  Empire,  and  add  to  it's  Itrength,  riches 
and  glory. 

Having  thus  largely  confidered  the  plan 
PROPOSED  for  an  American  Epifcopate,  and  what 
has  been  offered  in  it's  vindication,  I  (hall  not 
think  it  proper  to  conclude  without  firft  letting 
the  Dr.  and  his  friends  who  voted  him  their  writer, 
know,  that  we  give  full  credit  to  what  they  have 
declared,  upon  having  mentioned  their  plan  for  an 
Epifcopate,  upon  it's  first  appearance,  in  the 
Colonies,  namely,  "  this,  without  any  refervation, 
or  equivocation,  is  the  exadt  plan  which  has  been 
fettled  at  home  ;  and  the  only  one  on  which  Bi- 
fhops  have  been  requefted  here,  either  in  our  ge- 
neral or  more  particular  addrelTes".  But  then,  we 
would,  at  the  fame  time,  add,  that  we  mufl  be 
excufed,  if  we  fay,  we  do  not  believe,  they  would 
ever  have  contrived,  or  propofed,  this  plan,  had 
it  not  been,  as  they  imagined,  a  fcheme  for  the 
introduction  of  Biihops  that  woyld  carry  with  it  3 
plaufible  fhew,  and  give  opportunity  to  keep  that 
out  of  fight  which  would  occafion  univerfal  un- 
eafinefs  and  difcontent.  We  are  neither  fo  void 
of  difcernment,  or  unacquainted  with  the  intrigues 
of  thofe  who  are  mod  zealous  for  an  American 
Epifcopate,  as  not  to  be  fully  fatisfied,  they  have 
much  more  in  defign  than  they  have  been  pleafed 
openly  to  declare.  Their  ultimate  views,  what- 
ever they  propofe  to  begin  with,  have  not  been  fo 
perfe6lly  fecreted  in  their  own  breads,  but  that 
they  have  been  whifpered  about  from  one  friend 
to  another,  fo  that  we  are  at  no  lofs  to  form  a 
true  judgment  of  them.  The  Dr.  himfelf,  though 
B  b  he 


ao2     The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered. 

he  fays,  pag.  79.  "  they  have  carefully  confulted 
our  fafety  and  fecurity,  and  lludied  not  to  injure 
but  oblige  us",  has  yet  very  freely,  however  injudi- 
ciou fly,  given  us  to  underftand,  pag.  107=  that  "  a 
tax",  in  confequence  of  the  mifTion  of  Bifhops^ 
upon  this  very  plan,  "  may  be  laid  upon  the 
Country"  •,  which,  if  it  fhould,  "  would  be  no 
mighty  hardfhip",  and  (hould  we  thinic  it  fuch,  we 
*'  fliould  not  delerve  to  be  confidered  in  the  light  of 
good  lubjeds,  or  members  of  fociety"  :  Nay,  he 
even  fuppofes,  notwithftanding  the  exprels  guard 
againft  it  in  the  plan,  that  Bifhops  "  may  hereafter 
be  invefted  with  civil  powers  worthy  of  their  ac- 
ceptance", and  is  particular  in  his  juflification  of 
it  as  reafonable,  pag.  110.  Other  thmgs  have 
tranfpired  from  thofe,  who  did  not  know  how,  or 
were  not  able,  to  keep  a  fecret.  We  are  as  fully 
perfuaded,  as  if  they  had  openly  faid  it,  that  they 
have  in  view  nothing  (hort  of  a  complete 
Church  Hierarchy  after  the  pattern  of  that 
at  home,  with  like  officers  in  all  their  various 
degrees  of  dignity,  with  a  like  large  revenue  for 
their  grand  fupport,  and  with  the  allowance  of  no 
other  privilege  to  diflenters  but  that  of  a  bare  , 
toleration.  *     Such  an  Hierarchy  may  pofTibly,  in 

time, 

*  The  REASON,  upon  which  the  petition  of  the  New- 
York-Prefbyterian-Church  for  a  Charter  to  fecure  the 
bones  of  their  deceafed  relatives  aiad  friends,  was 
negatived  at  home,  by  the  interpofition  of  a  right 
reverend  Father  in  God,  is  an  evident  fpecimen  of 
this.  And  it  was,  without  all  doubt,  for  the  same 
31EAS0N  that  the  incorporating-a£t,  pafled  in  this  pro- 
vince, relative  to  the  propagation  of  religion  among  the 
Indjan-nativcs,  was,  in  like  manner,  through  Prelatical 
influence,  rendered  null  and  void.  And  if  what  wc 
have  heard  is  true,  that  a  twentieth  part,  of  the 

Apierican 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered.     20 


time,  take  place  in  the  Colonies  to  the  fouth  of 
Penlylvania  ;  bat  there  is  no  probability,  humanly 
fpeaking,  that  this  (hould  be  effeded  in  the  Colo- 
nies to  the  northward  of  it.  Had  it  not  been  for 
"'the  Society's  pious  charity,  we  fhould  not  have 
feen,  at  this  day,  it  may  reafonably  be  thought, 
more  than  half  a  fcoie  Epifcopai  Churches  in 
thefe  feven  Provinces  •,  and,  notwithftanding  the 
immenfe  fums  of  money  they  have  expended  in 
propagating  the  Church  of  England,  it's  numbers, 
within  thefe  bounds,  are  comparatively  trifflmg  ; 
and  they  confift,  in  great  parr,  of  thofe  too,  who 
are  no  otherwife  Epifcopalians,  than  their  being 
fb  tends  to  ferve  a  prefent  turn.  The  other  de- 
nominations, from  their  firll  capacity  of  moral 
difcernment,  have  been  indoflrinated  in  that  way 
of  fervmg  God  that  is  peculiar  to  them.  And 
will  they  eafily  give  this  up,  and  embrace  the 
Epifcopai  mode  of  worfhip  and  difcipline  ?  "  Hath 
a  nation  changed  their  gods  which  yet  are  no 
Gods"  ?  If  people,  in  pagan  Countries,  who  have 
been  taught  by  their  anceftors  to  worfhip  Idols, 
which  are  vanity,  inftead  of  the  living  Jehovah,, 
'v/iil  not,  without  the  utmoft  difiicuky,  be  v/roughc 
upon  to  change  the  objedl  of  their  devotion  ;  why 
B  b  2  Ihould 

American  conquered  lands,  as  they  are  and  may  hs 
granted  by  the  Crown  to  private  perfons,  or  bodies  of 
men,  is  and  will  be  appropriated  to  the  ufe  and  benefit 
of  the  Church  of  England  in  the  Colonies,  a  founda- 
tion is  laid,  and  laying  for  as  great  a  Church-revenue 
as  they  have  at  home.  Can  it  be  fuppofed,  that  thefe 
planners  have  nothing  in  viev.',  but  what  is  perfectly 
^'  barmlefs  to  other  denominations  ?"  Arc'- we  not, 
even,  neceiTicated  to  think,  that  the  plan  they  have 
propofed,  is  only  a  bait  thrown  out  to  catch  the  Ids 
thinking,  and  too  credulous  among  the  peopL^  : 


:i04    The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anfwered. 

fhould  it  be  thought,  that  the  Colonics  would 
renounce  thofe  religious  fenfimenis  and  modes   of 
exprefling  them,  that  were  handed  to  them  from 
their  fathers,  which,  inftead   of  being    ridiculous 
and  abfurd,  are  agreable  to  the  didates  of  uncor- 
Tupted  reafon,  and  the    truth  of  revelation,   and 
clearly  perceived    to    be   lo  ?  A  flrange   change 
muft  be  effe6led  in  that  temper  of  mind  they  have 
hitherto  difcovered,  and  that  has,  upon  certain  oc- 
cafions  in  providence,  been  greatly  improved  and 
Hrengthened,  if  they  (hould   be  periuaded,  inftead 
of  enjoying  the  freedom  of  chiiltians,  to  take  up- 
on them  that  yoke  of  bondage,   which  their  Pro- 
genitors threv^  off  as  too   burdenfome  and  galling 
to  bear  !  In  vain  may  this  be  looked  for.     There 
is  not  the  leaft:  reafonabie  room  to  hope  for  fuch  a 
thing;  and  it  is  really  furprifing,  theEpifcopalians 
are  not  convinced  of  it,  after  fo  long  a  tryal  to    fo 
little  purpofe.     It  is  our  firm   faith,  trufting  in 
God,  that  the  principles  of  religious  as  well  as  civil 
liberty  will   tvtr  diftingu'fli   thele  Colonics,    and 
that  gofpel  worihip  and  difcipline,  in  their-  purity 
and  fimplicity,  which  was  the  great  Errand  of  our 
fore-faihers  in  coming  over   to   this   new  v/orld, 
will  be  upheld  and  maintained  here,  from  genera- 
tion to  generation,  uncil  time  Ihall    be    no  more, 
whatever  pians  may  be   formed   to  the   conirary, 
and  whatever  efforts  may  be  made   to  carry  them 
into  execution. 

I  WOULD  now  afic  pardon  for  being  thus  lengthy, 
and  for  being  too  often  redioufly  lo  by  meer  re- 
petitions. 1  have  only  to  fay  in  excufe  for  my 
lelf,  that  I  was  not  willing  to  let  any  thing  pafs, 
the  Dr.  or  his  friends,  might  think  worthy  of 
notice,  and  fo  w6rthy   of  it  as  to   bring  to   view 

over 


The  Appeal  to  the  Public  anlwered.    205 

over  and  over  again.  If  he  had  comprehended 
what  he  has  offered  to  the  Public  in  a  few  pages, 
as  he  might  eafily  have  done,  and,  as  1  imagjrie, 
greatly  to  the  advantage  of  his  caufe,  he  would, 
have  faved  me  feme  trouble,  and  both  our  readers 
the  tryal  of  much  patience. 


**/ V/ Vv?  Vv' ^o/ ^A^  Vi^ 

«r$  CL»  qri)   dfji   tfp   qco   dnb 


\a^  Say  \o^  Xfl^ 


E    R    R    J    r    J. 

PAGE  II.  laft  line  read,  vol.  I.  pag.  637,  638.  p.  25. 1. 
y.r.  fomeof  thofe.  p. 28.  l.i.f.highnefs  in  fome  copies, 
r.  holinefs.  p. 30.  ).  3.  f.  nor.  fo  p  32. 1.  16.  f.  this  govern- 
ment r.  the  government  of  the  church,  p.  32. 1.  a.fr.  hot.  r. 
angels,  p.  36.].  6. r.  angels.  P.64..I.  6  fr.  bot.r.difobcdifnce. 
p.  65. 1.  19.  dele  the.  p.  8z.  1.  18.  f.  can  r.  cannot,  p.  85. 1. 
9.  r.  perfuafion.  p.  87. 1.  16.  r.  for  inftead  of  from  p  91.]. 
23.  r.  orders,  p.  93.  1.6.  fr.  hot.  r.  trade,  p.  97.  laft  1.  f.  real 
r.  intire.  p.  138.  1.  19.  r.RoYAL,  and  1.  5.  fr.  bot.  r.  1702. 
p.  150. 1.  10.  fr.  bot.  r.  facraments. 

'^^^^^^^^^'^^^^^^^^'^^^^^^^^^^^^ 


To  be  had  of  Thomas  Leverett,  at  his  Shop 
in  Corn-Hill. 

A  Few  of  Dr.  Chauncy's  Difcourfes  at  the 
Dudleian  Ledure,  at  Harvard-College  in 
Cambridge,  on  the  Validity  of  Prefbyterian  Ordi- 
nation : — His  Sermon  on  the  Repeal  of  the  Stamp- 
Ad  ; — and.  Remarks  on  the  Bifhop  of  Landaff's 
Society-Sermon. — As  alfo, — Henry  on  the  Bible, 
6  Vol.  Doddridge's  Family  Expofitcr,  6  Vol  Bur- 
ketton  theNew  Teflament,  Puffendorff's  Law  of 
Nature  and  Nations,  ditto  his  Inrrodudion,  i  Vol. 
Rolt's  Didionary  of  Trade  &  Commerce,  FlaveTs 
Works,  Hili's  Briiifh  Herbal,  Hogarth's  Analyfis, 
Seed's  Sermons,  4  Vol.  Rcfleau  Emilius,  Naval 
Trade  and  Commerce,  2  Vol.  Dictionary  of  Arts 
and  Sciences,  4  Vol.  Spedator,  8  Vol.  Howell's 
Hiftory  of  the  Bible,  3  Vol  Drake's  Anatomy,  3 
Vol  Quincy's  Lexicon,  ditto  Dirpenlatoiy,  Brook's 
Pradice  of  Phyfic,  2  Vol.  Huxham  on  Fevers, 
Wood's  Inftitutes,  Burn's  JulVicc,  3  Vol.  Barne's 
Notes  of  Cafes,  2  Vol.  Hiftory  of  Common  Law, 
Martin's  andGravelend's  Philofophy,  S.dmon's  and 
Gordon's  Geographical  Grammar,  Ainfworth's, 
Young's  and  Cole's  Latin  Didionary,  Johnfton's, 
Bailey's  and  Dyche's  Englifh  ditto,  Paradife  Loft, 
Young's  Night  Thoughts,  Thompfon's  Seafons, 
Cafes  of  Confcience,  2  Vol,  Vifitor,  2  Vol.  Elofia, 
4  Vol.  Tom  Jones,  4  Vol.  Roderick  Random,  2 
Vol.  Pamela,  4  Vol.  Folio,  Quarto,  and  other 
fiz'd  Bibles,  School,  and  a  Variety  of  other  Books, 
&c.  &c.  6CQ, 


Arltngtnn 

library 
(Sift  of 


23A 


L±M 


*5"Ix  T5'*i«k/:AT^aBf»**».  ■iM:  '^i='7^.1 


